Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
trading-mcp-server

trading-mcp-server

by mukul8896
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

fetch_paper_trades

Retrieve closed paper trades, optionally filtered by INTRADAY or DELIVERY, to review completed simulated trades.

Instructions

Closed paper trades, optionally filtered by INTRADAY or DELIVERY.

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": "fetch_paper_trades"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
product_typeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states the output (closed trades) and filter, but omits key behavioral details like whether it's read-only, rate limits, return format, or pagination. The agent cannot assess side effects or constraints.

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?

The description is extremely concise, a single sentence with no redundancy. However, it may be too brief, sacrificing completeness for brevity. It earns points for efficiency but loses for missing content.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of output schema, the description should explain the return structure, but it does not. The parameter guidance is minimal. For a low-complexity tool (1 param), this is insufficient for an agent to reliably use the tool.

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 description only adds that the filter values are 'INTRADAY or DELIVERY' without naming the parameter or explaining its meaning. This provides minimal guidance beyond the schema, leaving the parameter underspecified.

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 states it fetches 'Closed paper trades', which is specific and distinguishes it from tools like fetch_paper_portfolio (likely open positions) or close_paper_position. However, it could explicitly contrast with these siblings for perfect clarity.

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 description notes optional filtering by 'INTRADAY or DELIVERY', giving some usage context. But it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., fetch_paper_portfolio for open positions), leaving the agent to infer.

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