Indian Stock Exchange API2 MCP Server

fetch_52_week_high_low_data

Retrieve 52-week high and low price data for Indian stocks to analyze annual price ranges and identify potential support/resistance levels.

Instructions

$238

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "fetch_52_week_high_low_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Implementation Reference

server.py:56-61 (registration)
The `fetch_52_week_high_low_data` tool is automatically registered using `FastMCP.from_openapi` based on the provided OpenAPI specification in `server.py`. The handler logic is dynamically generated by `fastmcp` from the OpenAPI definition.
```
mcp = FastMCP.from_openapi(
    openapi_spec=openapi_dict,
    client=client,
    name="indian_stock_exchange_api2",
    version=__version__
)
```

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Mar 25, 2026

TDQS

D1.6/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. '$238' reveals nothing about whether this reads from cache, requires API keys, returns formatted data, or has rate limits. It is effectively empty.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

While extremely brief (4 characters), '$238' is cryptic rather than concise. It is not 'front-loaded' with useful information—instead, it appears to be a placeholder, corrupted value, or meaningless string that wastes the single descriptive field.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the complexity of financial data retrieval, the absence of an output schema, and lack of annotations, the description should explain return format, data sources, or ticker handling. '$238' provides none of this necessary context.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema has zero parameters and 100% description coverage. Per rubric guidelines, zero parameters establishes a baseline of 4. The description '$238' adds no explanatory value about why no inputs are needed (e.g., global context), but there are no parameters to document.

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

Purpose1/5

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

The description '$238' is completely opaque and fails to state what the tool does. It gives no indication that this tool fetches 52-week high/low stock data, forcing reliance solely on the tool name.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'historical_data' or 'get_stock_data_by_name'. The description lacks any conditional logic or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server