Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tossinvest-mcp

tossinvest-mcp

by clauzewitz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_conditional_order

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve details for one conditional order by ID, including its monitoring conditions, trigger, and resulting order; ended conditional orders are included.

Instructions

조건주문 1건의 상세(감시 조건·트리거·발생 주문)를 조회한다.

종료된 조건주문도 조회된다.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "conditional_order_id": "<conditional_order_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_conditional_order"
  }
}

Input Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — that terminated conditional orders remain retrievable — but says nothing about error behavior for unknown IDs or what happens when account_seq is omitted.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the core purpose front-loaded and the terminated-order caveat as a compact follow-up.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the three detail components returned. For a simple two-parameter read tool this is nearly complete; only the relationship to list_conditional_orders is left implicit.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters documented (including the account_seq fallback to TOSSINVEST_ACCOUNT_SEQ and the pointer to list_conditional_orders for the ID). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('조건주문 1건의 상세...를 조회한다') and enumerates the returned facets (감시 조건·트리거·발생 주문). The singular '1건' implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling list_conditional_orders, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the singular scope suggests fetching one order after listing, and '종료된 조건주문도 조회된다' clarifies a useful edge case. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over list_conditional_orders or any prerequisite guidance.

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