kite-mcp

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

While annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, the description adds valuable behavioral context by listing valid interval values (minute, day, 3minute, etc.) that are not present in the schema. However, it omits other behavioral traits like date format expectations, rate limits, or data retention limits.

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?

Two efficient sentences with zero waste: the first front-loads the purpose, and the second provides the interval enumeration. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema (not shown), the description appropriately avoids return value documentation, but remains incomplete regarding input parameter semantics for 3 of 4 required parameters given the 0% schema coverage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by documenting valid values for the interval parameter, but provides no semantic guidance for the other three parameters (instrument_token, from_date, to_date), leaving their expected formats and meanings undocumented.

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 retrieves 'historical candle data' using specific verb+resource terminology. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like `get_ohlc` or `get_quote` that may return similar market data, leaving ambiguity about when to select this specific tool.

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 provides valid values for the interval parameter but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `get_ohlc` or `get_quote`, nor does it mention prerequisites such as date format requirements or instrument token lookup.

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