toss-invest-mcp

trading_status

Read-only

Check current order safety status—mode, kill switch, order/daily limits, today's usage, allowed symbols, and verification method—before placing trades.

Instructions

주문 안전장치 상태: 모드(off/dry_run/live), 킬스위치, 1회·일일 한도, 오늘 사용량, 허용 종목, 확인 방식.

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": "trading_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

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

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 the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by naming the safety-state components the tool surfaces, but it does not disclose auth requirements, freshness guarantees, rate limits, or other behavior beyond annotations and the output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and then compactly enumerates its contents. Every item in the list earns its place by telling the agent what the status tool exposes.

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?

Given that the tool has no parameters, rich read-only annotations, and an output schema, the description is largely complete for invocation. It could still be improved by explicitly stating the use case, such as checking trading readiness before placing orders.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for schema coverage gaps.

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 clearly identifies the resource as the order safety-mechanism status and enumerates what it covers: mode, kill switch, limits, usage, allowed symbols, and confirmation method. It is specific enough to distinguish from order-placement siblings, but it omits an explicit action verb such as 'retrieve' and does not directly contrast itself with any named alternative.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as preview_order, place_order, buying_power, or order_log. The description only lists the status fields and leaves the agent to infer that this should be checked before trading or when diagnosing order restrictions.

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

Deploy Server