openkrx-mcp

get_esg_etp_info

Retrieve ESG ETP information for a given base date (YYYYMMDD) from the Korean Exchange's market data.

Instructions

ESG ETP 정보를 조회합니다.

Args: basDd: 기준일자 (YYYYMMDD)

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": {
      "basDd": "<basDd>"
    },
    "name": "get_esg_etp_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`basDd`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description merely states a read operation without disclosing behavioral details such as date range constraints, response structure, or any special requirements beyond the parameter format. It doesn't contradict annotations but provides minimal transparency.

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?

Two sentences: one for purpose, one for the parameter. No filler or redundant content; front-loaded and appropriately sized for a single-param tool.

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?

Given the simple tool (1 param, output schema exists), the description covers the essentials but lacks any contextual guidance about data scope or relationship to sibling daily data tools. It's minimally viable but not rich.

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 description's Args section adds meaning beyond the bare schema by defining basDd as '기준일자' (base date) and specifying format YYYYMMDD, compensating for the 0% schema coverage.

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 'ESG ETP 정보를 조회합니다' (retrieves ESG ETP information), providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling get_esg_index_info, though '정보' is broad and doesn't clarify whether this is daily data or static info.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like get_esg_index_info and various daily tools exist, but the description doesn't mention exclusions or preferred contexts.

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