tossinvest-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_program_trading

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve daily KRX program-trading buy, sell, and net-buy volumes for a Korean stock symbol, including arbitrage and non-arbitrage breakdowns, with date and count filters.

Instructions

[국내 전용] 종목의 일별 프로그램매매(차익·비차익) 매수·매도·순매수 거래량.

KRX 만 집계한다 (NXT 제외).

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": {
      "symbol": "<symbol>"
    },
    "name": "get_program_trading"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	No	조회 일수 (최대 100)
`until`	No	이 날짜(YYYY-MM-DD, 포함)까지 최신순으로 조회. 다음 페이지는 이전 응답의 nextUntil 값을 넣는다
`symbol`	Yes	국내 종목 6자리 코드(예: 005930). 미국 종목은 지원하지 않는다

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

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 genuinely new behavioral context: aggregation is KRX-only and NXT data is excluded, which materially affects interpretation. It does not describe pagination behavior despite the until/nextUntil paging model in the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short lines: the first states what is returned, the second states the exchange scope caveat. Front-loaded and waste-free, though the bracketed language tag is slightly noisy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

A read-only lookup tool with a fully described schema and no output schema; the core is covered. However, nothing is said about the shape of returned series or pagination semantics, which matters for a time-series endpoint returning up to 100 rows.

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 coverage is 100%, so symbol, count and until are already fully documented including the nextUntil paging hint. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema; 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?

Names a specific resource (daily program trading: arbitrage/non-arbitrage buy/sell/net volume) and states the domestic-only scope. Distinguishes from siblings like get_investor_trading or get_credit_trading by naming program trading explicitly, though it doesn't contrast them directly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

Says it is 국내 전용 and KRX-only (NXT excluded), which acts as a constraint rather than when-to-use guidance. No explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_investor_trading, get_credit_trading, or get_recent_trades.

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