TWSE MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool as a retrieval operation, which implies it is read-only and non-destructive, but does not explicitly state this or cover other behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling. The description adds some context about event types but lacks comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with a clear purpose statement, followed by elaboration, and then structured sections for Args and Returns. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-organized.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema (which reduces the need to detail return values in the description), the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, parameter semantics, and return format, though it could improve by adding more behavioral context or usage guidelines relative to siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining the 'top' parameter's semantics, including its default value (10) and behavior when empty or 0 (returns all events). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's basic type and title.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Get', 'Retrieves') and resources ('Taiwan Stock Exchange event announcements and activities'), including examples like seminars and training sessions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that focus on stocks, companies, or market data by specifically targeting TWSE-organized events.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage context by stating it retrieves events 'of interest to market participants and investors', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. No sibling tools are mentioned for comparison, leaving usage guidance incomplete.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.