Indian Stock Exchange API2 MCP Server

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

Discloses the HTTP method (GET) implying read-only behavior, but provides no other behavioral details. With no annotations provided, the description fails to cover: authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what occurs when no results match the query.

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?

Uses markdown header syntax ('### Mutual Fund Search') and API documentation boilerplate ('Endpoint', 'Parameters') that adds unnecessary noise. The response section is abruptly truncated ('[ { \'), indicating poor editing and structural bloat.

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?

For a simple single-parameter search tool, the description covers the input parameter but lacks critical context: no output schema explanation (despite mentioning Response), no differentiation from similar siblings, and no behavioral constraints. Incomplete for practical agent usage.

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?

Description states the query is 'The search term to query the mutual funds,' which adds semantic intent. However, with 100% schema description coverage already providing an example value ('nippon'), the description adds minimal value beyond the schema itself, warranting the baseline score.

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?

States the tool searches for mutual funds, which is clear. However, it fails to differentiate from the sibling tool 'mutual_funds' (also present in the server), leaving ambiguity about which to use for specific retrieval scenarios.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The distinction from the 'mutual_funds' sibling is not explained, and there are no conditions or prerequisites mentioned.

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