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 of behavioral disclosure. It fails to indicate whether this is a cached or real-time endpoint, if it requires specific permissions, or whether it is idempotent and safe to call repeatedly. The word 'currently' (目前) implies timeliness but lacks specificity on data freshness.

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 consists of a single, efficient sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action (取得/get) and target resource immediately, making it appropriately sized for a zero-parameter data retrieval tool.

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?

While the tool has no input parameters and an output schema exists (reducing the description's burden), the complete absence of annotations means the description should ideally disclose behavioral traits like read-only safety or rate limiting. As written, it is minimally viable but leaves operational context gaps.

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?

The input schema contains zero parameters. According to scoring rules, tools with no parameters receive a baseline score of 4, as there are no parameter semantics to describe beyond what the empty schema already communicates.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves current lending/borrowing interest rates (借貸利率) for various currencies in the M wallet (M 錢包), providing specific verb and resource identification. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like `get_m_interests` (which likely returns accrued interest records rather than rate schedules).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing to check rates before calling `submit_m_loan`. It states what the tool does but not the contextual circumstances for its use.

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