kite-connect-mcp

Charges for orders (virtual contract note)

get_order_charges

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate the charges Kite would levy on 1–50 executed or imaginary orders, including brokerage, taxes, stamp duty, and GST, with a per-order and total breakdown and no order placement.

Instructions

Charges Kite would levy on 1 to 50 executed or imaginary orders (a virtual contract note), without placing anything (works in read-only mode too): brokerage, transaction tax (STT, or CTT on commodities), exchange and SEBI turnover charges, stamp duty and GST, all INR.

Give each order's average_price (the price it was or would be executed at; must be above 0); order_id can be any string. Each entry in orders is Kite's answer for one order: the order's fields, the price used and a charges block (total plus the breakdown). summary has the grand total, the total per component and a line per order.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "orders": "<orders>"
    },
    "name": "get_order_charges"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`orders`	Yes	1 to 50 orders

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

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 still adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: nothing is placed, it works in read-only mode, currency is INR, and the 1-to-50 batch limit — useful for predicting scope and side effects.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short paragraphs, front-loaded with the purpose and scope, then the per-order input requirement, then the return shape. Every clause — batch size, INR, the charges/summary split — earns its place with no filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description does the necessary work of describing the return value: each `orders` entry carries the order fields, the price used, and a `charges` block, while `summary` aggregates the total and per-component totals. It is complete enough to call correctly; only error behavior and any throttling are unaddressed.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; every field including average_price, order_id and the enums is already documented in the schema. The description adds only a light gloss on average_price ('the price it was or would be executed at') and order_id ('can be any string'), which largely restates the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a precise verb and resource — computes the charges Kite would levy on 1 to 50 executed or imaginary orders (a 'virtual contract note') — and immediately distinguishes itself from order placement with 'without placing anything'. An agent can tell this is a cost-estimation tool, not a mutation or margin tool, without opening the schema.

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 rather than stated: the 'executed or imaginary orders' framing and the read-only note tell the agent this is for pre-trade cost estimation, but it never explicitly says when to prefer it over get_order_margins, get_basket_margins, or get_trades, nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites.

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