kite-connect-mcp

Today's orders

get_orders

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the day’s order book, including open and executed orders, newest first. Filter by status or trading symbol and paginate results to review order details.

Instructions

The day's order book (open and executed orders), newest first. Each order has order_id, status, status_message, variety, exchange, tradingsymbol, transaction_type, order_type, product, quantity, filled/pending/cancelled quantities, price, trigger_price, average_price, timestamps and tag.

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_orders"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`status`	No	open = still working (OPEN, TRIGGER PENDING, AMO...), or a final state	all
`tradingsymbol`	No	only orders for this tradingsymbol

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, idempotent=true, destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: the ordering (newest first), the scope restriction to the current day, the inclusion of both working and final states, and a full field inventory that substitutes for the missing output schema. It omits pagination behavior and the 100/500 limit caps, keeping it from a 5.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loaded with the scope and ordering, which is correct. The second sentence is a long run-on enumeration of roughly twenty return fields; it earns some place because there is no output schema, but the flat comma list is dense rather than structured.

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?

The description compensates for the absent output schema by enumerating returned fields, which is the right call for a list tool. However, for a paginated, filterable endpoint it says nothing about paging through results or narrowing by status/tradingsymbol, leaving an agent under-informed about how to retrieve more than the default 100 orders.

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 50%: status and tradingsymbol have inline descriptions, but limit (default 100, max 500) and offset are bare. The description mentions none of the four parameters, so it does nothing to compensate for the coverage gap or explain paging semantics for this list endpoint.

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 verb+resource ('the day's order book') and scopes it to open and executed orders, newest first. The agent can tell it returns today's orders rather than historical ones, though the description never explicitly contrasts itself with get_order_history or get_trades.

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?

The phrase 'the day's order book' implies this is the today-only view, which indirectly routes the agent away from get_order_history, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. With 50+ siblings including get_order_history, get_trades and get_order_trades, an explicit differentiation would materially help.

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