kite-connect-mcp

GTT order book

get_gtts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve and filter Good-Till-Triggered (GTT) orders from a Zerodha Kite account, newest first, including active and previous 7-day records with status, limit, and offset controls.

Instructions

The GTT book, newest first: every active GTT and those in other states from the previous 7 days. Each has id (the trigger_id), type (single or two-leg), status, created_at / updated_at / expires_at (IST), condition (exchange, tradingsymbol, trigger_values, last_price at placement), orders (with result once an order was placed by the trigger, including the rejection reason if the order failed) and meta.

Tool call template

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": "get_gtts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`status`	No	only GTTs in this state; omit for all (active, triggered, disabled, expired, ...)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: result ordering (newest first), the retention window (7 days for non-active states), IST timestamps, and the fact that order `result` carries rejection reasons. It omits pagination behavior, which would have completed the picture.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the scope and retention window, then a compact field inventory. Dense but nearly every clause carries information; the second sentence runs long but is not padded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description correctly takes on the burden of explaining return fields (id/trigger_id, type, status, timestamps, condition, orders, meta) and does so well. However, for a paged list capped at 500 records it says nothing about how limit/offset shape results or what happens when the window exceeds a page, leaving a meaningful gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 33% — status is documented, but limit (max 500, default 100) and offset are bare. The description does not mention filtering by status or pagination at all, so it fails to compensate for the low coverage on a tool whose result set is explicitly capped.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific resource and scope: 'The GTT book, newest first: every active GTT and those in other states from the previous 7 days.' This clearly separates it in spirit from the singular sibling get_gtt, though the description never names that alternative explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the scope statement (list all active GTTs plus recent non-active ones), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no pointer to get_gtt for fetching a single GTT. An agent must infer the routing from the plural name.

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