Enumerates installed MetaTrader terminals by locating data folders under %APPDATA%\MetaQuotes\Terminal, enabling selection for builds, backtests, or logs.
Enumerate all MetaTrader terminal data folders under %APPDATA%\MetaQuotes\Terminal.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.0Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "title": "list_terminalsDictOutput",
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.4.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) and adds no contradictory behavior. It does not go beyond the annotations by describing output shape, environment requirements, or potential quirks, but for a simple enumeration tool the annotation coverage lessens the burden on the description.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the operation, the resource, and the exact location in as few words as possible.
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?
With zero parameters and an output schema present, the description covers everything needed to invoke the tool correctly. It states the exact directory and the operation performed, leaving no ambiguity for an agent.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the description cannot add parameter-level meaning. Per the baseline for 0-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; no further parameter explanation is needed.
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 uses a specific verb ('Enumerate') and a specific resource ('MetaTrader terminal data folders under %APPDATA%\MetaQuotes\Terminal'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_snapshots or list_backtests without needing to inspect schemas.
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 makes the tool's use-case obvious: call it when you need to list all terminal data folders. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, such as when to prefer select_terminal or list_snapshots. Usage guidance is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.