Retrieve an asset's last trade price, previous close, percent change, and session open status. Convert the price to TRY or USD on request.
Bir sembolün son işlem fiyatını önceki kapanış, yüzde değişim ve seansın açık olup olmadığıyla birlikte döner.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Sembol, ör. TUCLK, THYAO, AAPL | |
| currency | No | Fiyatı enstrümanın kendi para birimi yerine bu para birimine çevir |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds context by specifying exactly what data will be returned (price, previous close, % change, market open status), which is useful beyond the annotations. No contradiction with annotations.
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, efficient sentence that front-loads the primary output (last transaction price) and then lists supporting fields. There is zero redundancy or unnecessary detail.
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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers the return payload: price, previous close, percentage change, and session open status. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call it correctly.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with both 'symbol' and 'currency' already documented with examples and conversion instructions. The tool description adds no parameter-specific detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate—the schema carries the burden.
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 returns the last transaction price along with previous close, percentage change, and market open status. This is a specific verb-resource pair with concrete return fields, and it distinguishes from siblings like get_chart or get_asset_info which cover broader data.
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 purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer it is for fetching price-related data, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_asset_info or get_chart. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, so the usage context is implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.