toss-invest-mcp

technicals

Read-only

Summarize a stock's technical indicators—RSI, Bollinger Bands, moving averages, recent returns, streaks, and drawdown position—to assess momentum and trend conditions.

Instructions

기술 지표 요약: RSI(14, Wilder), 볼린저(20, 2σ), 이동평균 5/20/60, 1·5·20봉 등락률, 연속 상승/하락, 조회 구간 고점 대비 위치. 최근 120봉 기준. 마지막 봉이 진행 중이면 실시간 값이다.

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": "technicals"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`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

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: the 120-bar window and the caveat that the last bar is a live, still-forming value when in progress — important for interpreting the numbers.

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?

A single dense sentence enumerating metrics with the lookback and realtime caveat appended — no filler, and the substantive content is front-loaded. It is compact without becoming a spec dump.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description already enumerates what those returns contain. The main remaining gap is parameter meaning (notably symbol format), which is a schema-side deficiency rather than missing narrative about behavior.

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% across 2 parameters, so the description must compensate, and it largely does not. It never explains what 'symbol' expects (ticker format? market suffix?) and only indirectly implies that 'interval' (1d/1m) matters via the bar-count language. The enum values are self-evident from the schema, but symbol semantics remain unexplained.

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 names the concrete computed outputs (RSI(14, Wilder), Bollinger(20, 2σ), MA 5/20/60, 1/5/20-bar change rates, streak counts, position vs. range high) and the lookback basis (last 120 bars), so an agent knows this is a derived-indicator tool, not raw prices. It does not name a sibling (e.g. candles) to differentiate itself, but the specificity of the payload makes the resource unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The '기술 지표 요약' framing implies the tool is used when technical/momentum context is wanted rather than raw OHLC, and the realtime-last-bar note hints at intraday use. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternative (candles, quote) is mentioned for agents weighing options.

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

Deploy Server