MAX Exchange MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. It specifies key return fields (KYC status, account ID) which helps, but omits safety characteristics (idempotency, rate limits), cache behavior, or error conditions. For a read-only getter with no parameters, mentioning the specific data returned provides minimal viable transparency.

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?

Single sentence with information-dense parenthetical. No filler words. The structure immediately identifies the action, subject, and specific data points returned, achieving maximum clarity with minimum length.

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 tool has zero parameters and an output schema exists, the description adequately covers the essential functionality by listing representative output fields. However, it could be improved by explicitly mentioning authentication/session requirements or rate limit considerations for a user-data endpoint.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage. Per scoring rules, zero-parameter tools receive a baseline score of 4. The description appropriately does not fabricate parameter semantics where none exist.

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 uses specific verb '取得' (get/retrieve) with clear resource '用戶資訊' (user information) and scope '目前登入帳戶' (currently logged-in account). The parenthetical examples (KYC status, account ID) precisely distinguish this from sibling 'get_accounts' which likely returns trading account data rather than identity/KYC profile data.

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus siblings like 'get_accounts', nor any prerequisites mentioned. While 'currently logged-in' implies session-based authentication is required, the description does not state when this tool is preferred over alternatives or any conditions that would make it unavailable.

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