AgentLadle MCP AKShare

get_dragon_tiger_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the dragon-tiger list of major institutional trades for A-share stocks within a specified date range, with optional stock symbol filter.

Instructions

Get dragon-tiger list (龙虎榜 — major institutional trades).

Provide date range; optionally filter by symbol. get_dragon_tiger_list(start="2026-07-01", end="2026-07-08")

Args: start: Start date YYYY-MM-DD end: End date YYYY-MM-DD symbol: Filter by stock (optional)

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": "get_dragon_tiger_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`end`	No
`start`	No
`symbol`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`hint`	No
`error`	No
`cached`	No
`source`	No
`status`	Yes
`updated_at`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety and retry behavior. The description adds context that the list contains 'major institutional trades' but does not disclose other behavioral traits like pagination or limits. It does not contradict annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes a strategy and example without unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It fully covers the tool's use with all three optional parameters explained and annotations providing safety context. No gaps.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's 'Args' section adds meaning by explaining start/end as YYYY-MM-DD dates and symbol as an optional stock filter, which compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the 'dragon-tiger list', also explained as 'major institutional trades', which is a specific resource with a clear verb. Among siblings like get_block_trade or get_trades, this is uniquely identified.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description instructs to provide a date range and optionally filter by symbol, which gives clear context. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool versus other trade-related siblings or mention when not to use it.

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

Deploy Server