Retrieve day-trade balance and PDT account tags to monitor trading limits.
Get day-trade balance and PDT-related account tags.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "ibkr_get_daytrade_status"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility but only states what the tool gets, not behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication needs, or behavior with a null account_id. It lacks essential context for safe invocation.
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 a single clear sentence, front-loading the key action and resource. No extra words or redundancies.
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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is somewhat lacking. It does not explain the return format or what 'PDT-related account tags' entails, leaving gaps for an agent.
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 has one optional parameter (account_id) with zero description coverage, and the tool description adds no meaning about the parameter's purpose, default behavior, or effect on results. The agent gets no help understanding the parameter.
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 'day-trade balance and PDT-related account tags,' which is a specific verb and resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like ibkr_get_account_summary or ibkr_get_positions.
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 implies usage when needing day-trade or PDT status but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites. No exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.