kite-mcp

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context by clarifying the semantic meaning of 'margins' and specifying coverage for equity and commodity segments, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like caching, rate limits, or real-time vs. delayed data.

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 key information. Every clause earns its place: defining the resource, clarifying the terminology, and specifying the scope segments.

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 tool has no input parameters and an output schema exists (covering return values), the description provides sufficient semantic context. It could be improved by noting authentication requirements or data freshness, but remains complete for selection purposes.

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 input schema contains zero parameters. Per the baseline rule for zero-parameter tools, this dimension scores a 4.

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 provides a specific verb (Get) and resource (account margins/funds) and clarifies that 'margins' refers to 'funds available for trading.' It further distinguishes scope by specifying equity and commodity segments, helping differentiate from sibling tools like get_holdings or get_positions.

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 implies when to use the tool (to check available trading funds) but lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_holdings or get_positions, and does not mention prerequisites like authentication requirements.

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