MAX Exchange MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. While '查詢' (query) implies a read-only operation, the description lacks disclosure about error handling (e.g., invalid UUID), authentication requirements, or rate limiting. No behavioral traits beyond the basic operation are documented.

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

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

The description is extremely terse with no wasted words. However, the structure mixes natural language with Sphinx-style parameter documentation in a single string, which is slightly awkward but functional.

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

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

For a simple retrieval-by-ID tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description covers the basics adequately. However, it lacks contextual guidance on the conversion lifecycle and differentiation from the plural 'get_converts', preventing a higher score.

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

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by documenting the single parameter ':param uuid: 兌換單 UUID', which clarifies that the UUID refers specifically to the exchange/conversion order. This adds essential semantic meaning that the schema lacks.

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

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

The description '查詢單筆閃兌詳情' (Query single flash exchange/conversion details) provides a specific verb and resource. The term '單筆' (single) implicitly distinguishes this from the sibling tool 'get_converts' (plural), though explicit differentiation is not stated in the text.

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

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

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'get_converts' (list) or 'submit_convert' (create). There are no prerequisites, error conditions, or workflow recommendations mentioned.

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