MAX Exchange MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It successfully discloses specific behavioral aspects by listing the exact data fields returned (latest price, bid/ask prices, 24h volume) and noting '即時' (real-time). However, it omits mention of read-only safety or rate limiting.

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?

Uses efficient docstring format with no waste. The two-line structure (purpose + param) front-loads the core action and immediately follows with the required parameter specification.

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?

Given the output schema exists (per context signals), the description appropriately does not detail return structures. For a single-parameter tool, it covers the essential behavioral context (real-time data retrieval) and parameter semantics completely.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by defining the parameter as '市場 ID' (Market ID) and providing concrete examples ('btcusdt', 'ethusdt'), giving the agent clear semantic meaning and expected format.

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?

Description states '取得單一市場即時行情' (get real-time quotes for a single market) with specific data points (latest price, bid/ask, 24h volume). The term '單一市場' (single market) clearly distinguishes this from the sibling tool 'get_tickers' (plural).

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?

While '單一市場' implies usage for individual market queries vs bulk operations, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'get_tickers', 'get_depth', or 'get_markets'. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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