Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
InvestBrain

InvestBrain

by lj22503
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

broker_list_trades

Retrieve imported standardized trade records filtered by date range, symbol, side, and broker, returning reverse-chronological results for investment review.

Instructions

查询已导入的标准化交易记录（默认时间倒序）。

Args:
    start_date: 起始日期 YYYY-MM-DD（含）
    end_date: 结束日期 YYYY-MM-DD（含）
    symbol: 按证券代码模糊筛选（如 600519）
    side: 买卖方向筛选，可选 buy / sell / other / unknown
    broker: 券商标识筛选，可选 htsc / citic / cms / gtja / generic
    limit: 返回条数上限（默认 200，最大 2000）

Returns:
    {total: n, trades: [{id, trade_date, trade_time, side, symbol,
                         symbol_name, price, quantity, amount, fee,
                         net_amount, broker, contract_no}...]}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sideNo
limitNo
brokerNo
symbolNo
end_dateNo
start_dateNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose useful behavior: default time-descending sort, default limit of 200 with a max of 2000, and the full return shape. It does not state read-only safety explicitly or explain paging beyond the limit cap, but the substantive behavioral facts are present.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then a clean Args/Returns split. Each line carries information and there is no filler, though the docstring formatting makes it slightly longer than a prose equivalent.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly documents the return structure (total plus trade fields). All six parameters are covered, and the read/list semantics need no permission disclosure beyond what is stated. Complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate entirely, and it does: every one of the six parameters is documented in the Args block with meaning, format (YYYY-MM-DD, 含/inclusive), example values, and the accepted value sets for side (buy/sell/other/unknown) and broker (htsc/citic/cms/gtja/generic). Nothing in the schema adds meaning beyond this.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (查询/list) and resource (已导入的标准化交易记录), plus the default ordering. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like broker_get_trade_stats and broker_get_imports, which operate on aggregates and imports rather than individual trade rows.

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?

Usage is implied (list imported normalized trades, filter by date/symbol/side/broker) but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not, and no guidance on choosing this over broker_get_trade_stats or broker_get_imports. An agent must infer the boundary from the resource name alone.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools