kite-mcp

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

Aligns with readOnlyHint annotation (safe read operation). Adds valuable domain context: valid exchange codes (NSE, BSE, etc.) and explains the purpose of instrument_token in the ecosystem, which annotations don't provide.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: purpose first, usage context second, parameter hints third. Appropriately dense for the tool's complexity.

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?

Complete given output schema exists (no need to describe return values). Covers purpose, exchange domain values, and workflow integration. Minor gap: doesn't explain 'search' parameter behavior or filtering logic.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description compensates partially by listing valid exchange values (NSE, BSE, etc.), but completely omits the 'search' parameter's purpose and semantics, leaving one parameter 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?

States specific action (get list) and resource (tradeable instruments), and clearly distinguishes from siblings by referencing instrument_token specifically for historical data workflows, distinguishing it from get_quote or get_holdings.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('Use to find instrument_token for historical data'), linking it to the get_historical_data workflow. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or distinctions from get_quote, but provides clear positive guidance.

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