finstack-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing the 0.5% quantity threshold filter, but omits other behavioral traits like data freshness, pagination behavior, or whether the results are cached vs real-time.

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?

The description is efficiently structured with no wasted words: purpose (sentence 1), filtering logic (sentence 2), use case (sentence 3), usage guidance (sentence 4), and example (sentence 5). Every sentence earns its place and information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It explains what constitutes a bulk deal (the 0.5% rule) without needing to document return values, which are presumably covered by the output schema.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description confirms this state with 'No arguments needed,' providing explicit validation of the empty schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('recent bulk and block deals on NSE'). It distinguishes from siblings by defining the specific inclusion criteria (0.5% of total shares threshold) and mentioning institutional activity, clearly differentiating it from general quote or historical data tools.

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?

It provides clear usage context with 'Useful for tracking institutional activity' and explicitly states 'No arguments needed.' However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this over similar tools like 'nse_fii_dii_data' or whether it returns intraday vs daily data.

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