finstack-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully discloses return format (OHLCV data with summary stats) and scope (global stocks), but omits mutation/safety details, rate limits, or error behavior.

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?

Excellent structure with clear sections: purpose statement, return value description, Args documentation, and Examples. Every sentence earns its place; examples efficiently demonstrate valid parameter combinations without redundancy.

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 output schema exists (per context signals), the description appropriately summarizes returns (OHLCV) without over-specifying. Parameters are fully documented. Minor gap: no mention of data availability limits or error handling for invalid symbols.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by documenting all 3 parameters with valid value enumerations (e.g., '1d, 5d, 1mo...') and concrete examples (AAPL, MSFT), adding essential semantic meaning absent from the 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?

Description states specific action 'Get historical price data' and resource 'global stock', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like crypto_historical (cryptocurrency) and nse_historical (India-specific exchange).

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?

Provides concrete usage examples showing parameter combinations (e.g., '1y' with '1d'), but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance versus alternatives like stock_quote (likely real-time) or when to prefer nse_historical for Indian equities.

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