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 of behavioral disclosure but fails to mention critical financial operation details: whether this creates an immediate debt position, requires pre-existing collateral, interest accrual behavior, or idempotency concerns for the submit action.

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?

Extremely compact with zero filler text. The :param docstring format is functional but slightly unconventional for MCP descriptions; front-loading the param examples directly into the main description text rather than using structured docstrings might improve parseability.

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?

Inadequate for a high-risk financial mutation tool. Despite having an output schema (reducing the need to describe returns), the description omits critical context: relationship to 'get_m_limits' or 'get_m_ad_ratio' siblings for pre-validation, error conditions (insufficient collateral), and the irreversible nature of loan initiation.

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?

Compensates effectively for 0% schema coverage by providing concrete examples for both parameters ('usdt', 'btc' for currency; '1000' for amount) and clarifying that amount expects a string type. Does not document valid currency enumerations, precision constraints, or minimum/maximum thresholds.

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 applies for a loan from 'M Wallet' (向 M 錢包申請借貸), providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this creation action from sibling 'get_m_loans' (retrieval) or 'submit_m_repayment' (repayment), though the verb 'apply' implies creation.

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 alternatives like 'get_m_loans' for checking existing positions. No mention of prerequisites such as collateral requirements, account verification, or available credit limits before invoking.

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