tossinvest-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_sectors

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves the full Toss Securities sector hierarchy (large, medium, small) so you can find sector IDs for other sector tools; data is cached daily in KST.

Instructions

토스증권 섹터 분류 전체(대·중·소분류 계층)를 조회한다.

depth 0=대분류, 1=중분류, 2=소분류. 다른 섹터 tool 의 sector_id 는 여기서 찾는다. 하루 1회 갱신 데이터라 당일(KST) 동안 캐싱한다.

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": "list_sectors"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and open-world traits, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely useful context: the data is refreshed once per day and cached for the same day in KST, which tells an agent about staleness. However, it says nothing about the response shape or the size of the full listing.

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?

Four short lines, front-loaded with the purpose and then the hierarchy, ID, and freshness notes. There is no filler. The depth notation is slightly unclear because depth is not an actual parameter; it describes the returned levels, which the reader must infer.

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 no-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description covers what matters: what is returned, the level structure, that IDs come from here, and refresh/caching behavior. Only the exact return format and listing size are left out, and those are minor.

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?

With zero parameters there is nothing to document, so the baseline is a 4. The 'depth 0=대분류, 1=중분류, 2=소분류' line adds meaning about the structure of the returned hierarchy, which substitutes for the missing output schema.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: retrieving the full Toss Securities sector classification as a large/mid/small hierarchy. The word '전체' (entire) implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling get_sector, which presumably returns a single sector, 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It gives a concrete usage rule: the sector_id used by other sector tools is found here, which tells an agent to call this first before get_sector, get_sector_stocks, get_sector_etfs, or get_sector_rankings. It does not state any when-not conditions or name those siblings directly.

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