Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tossinvest-mcp

tossinvest-mcp

by clauzewitz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_commissions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve domestic and US stock trading commission rates for a Toss Securities account, returned as decimal ratios (e.g., 0.00015 = 0.015%).

Instructions

계좌의 국내·미국 매매 수수료율을 조회한다. 소수 비율 (0.00015 = 0.015%).

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_commissions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_seqNo계좌 accountSeq (list_accounts 로 확인). 생략하면 TOSSINVEST_ACCOUNT_SEQ 설정값

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint true and openWorldHint true, so safety and idempotency are covered. The description adds genuinely useful context that values are returned as decimal ratios (0.00015 = 0.015%), which prevents unit misinterpretation, but it says nothing about fallback behavior, failure modes, or response structure.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, followed by the one piece of non-obvious information (unit format). Nothing is wasted or repeated.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and output-unit interpretation, which is the main ambiguity. It is slightly under-specified on whether both domestic and US rates come back together and under what field names, but nothing critical is missing.

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?

One optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage that already explains accountSeq, the list_accounts lookup, and the TOSSINVEST_ACCOUNT_SEQ default. The description adds no parameter detail, so the schema carries this dimension; baseline applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

Specific verb (조회/retrieve) plus resource (국내·미국 매매 수수료율) and scope (계좌 기준). An agent can tell it returns fee rates rather than prices or balances, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings such as get_buying_power 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.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternatives; usage is only implied by the purpose statement. In practice, an agent can infer this is the fee-lookup tool, but nothing tells it what to do if the account is unknown beyond the schema note on the default.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools