Jesse MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return structure ('Dict with equity_curve containing timestamp, equity, drawdown data'), but omits safety profile (read-only vs. destructive), rate limits, or error handling behavior.

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?

Uses a standard docstring format (Args/Returns) that is appropriately front-loaded with the core action. The Args section is necessary given 0% schema coverage, though 'Session ID' wastes a line. Returns section efficiently summarizes output structure.

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 2-parameter retrieval tool, it adequately covers the output format despite the existence of an output schema. However, it lacks enumeration of valid 'resolution' values (e.g., '1h', '1d') and omits error scenarios (e.g., invalid session_id behavior).

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 coverage is 0%, requiring the description to compensate. It provides minimal context for 'session_id' (tautological: 'Session ID') but adds meaningful domain context for 'resolution' (applies to 'equity curve data'). It meets baseline viability but does not fully compensate for the schema gap.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Get') + resource ('equity curve data') + scope ('paper trading session'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'trading_paper_trades' (individual trades) and 'trading_paper_metrics' (summary statistics).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this versus alternatives like 'trading_paper_metrics' or 'trading_paper_list', nor are prerequisites (like obtaining a valid session_id) mentioned.

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