toss-invest-mcp

order_log

Read-only

Retrieves recent order-related logs, including previews, executions, rejections, and cancellations, to help audit or review trading activity.

Instructions

이 서버가 남긴 최근 주문 관련 로그 (미리보기, 실행, 거절, 취소).

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": "order_log"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`n`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 25, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety and scope are covered structurally. The description adds useful content detail (the four log event types), but says nothing about ordering, recency window, or what happens when no logs exist.

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?

One compact sentence with no filler, and the resource is front-loaded. The parenthetical category list is dense but earns its place.

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?

Output schema and annotations carry the return shape and safety profile, so the description needn't restate them. However, for a log-retrieval tool the description omits ordering and the meaning/limits of `n`, which an agent needs to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single parameter `n` (default 20) is never explained in the description. It is presumably the number of log entries to return, but that must be guessed, which is a real gap since the only parameter is undocumented in both places.

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?

States a specific resource (recent order-related logs from this server) and enumerates the log categories (preview, execution, rejection, cancellation), which goes beyond the bare name. It is not explicitly distinguished from the sibling `orders` or `order_detail`, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

No statement of when to use this instead of `orders`, `order_detail`, or `trading_status`, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer routing from sibling names alone.

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

Deploy Server