toss-invest-mcp

candles

Read-only

Fetch OHLCV candlestick data for a stock symbol at daily or 1-minute intervals, returning up to 200 bars with the newest first.

Instructions

캔들(OHLCV) 조회. interval 은 '1d'(일봉) 또는 '1m'(1분봉), count 최대 200. 최신 봉이 배열 첫 번째.

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": "candles"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`count`	No
`symbol`	Yes
`interval`	No	1d

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 25, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, non-destructive safety profile, and the description adds two non-obvious behavioral facts: a hard count ceiling of 200 and reverse-chronological array ordering (latest bar first). It omits error behavior for unknown symbols and whether Korean market tickers are accepted.

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?

Three short clauses, front-loaded with the resource and then the two constraints that matter most — nothing redundant. The fragments are terse to the point of being telegraphic, but no sentence is wasted.

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?

Return shape is covered by an output schema, so the description only needed to add the ordering note, which it does. However, for a market-data tool in a suite containing both US and KR securities siblings, it never states which symbols/markets are valid — a real gap for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining the three parameters. It does decode the interval enum ('1d'=daily, '1m'=1-minute) and the count cap, but leaves 'symbol' completely undefined — no ticker format, market prefix, or case convention.

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 ('캔들(OHLCV) 조회' — retrieve OHLCV candles), which is clearly a time-series bar lookup rather than a snapshot. It never names a sibling to contrast with, so differs from quote/orderbook/technicals only by inference from the resource name.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no exclusions — nothing says whether to prefer this over 'quote' for the latest price or 'technicals' for indicator data. The agent must infer the use case purely from the word 'candle'.

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

Deploy Server