FinanceKit MCP

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds useful context about the specific data returned (indices, VIX, movers, sentiment) and its scope (watchlist of 15 major stocks), but does not disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, data freshness, or error handling.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by detailed return values in the second. Both sentences earn their place by providing essential information without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (providing multiple data points), rich annotations (readOnlyHint), and existence of an output schema, the description is complete. It clearly outlines what data is returned without needing to explain parameters or return values in detail.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 4. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, as none exist, and focuses on the tool's output semantics instead.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('Get a snapshot') and resources ('major market indices, VIX, and top stock movers'), and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on a comprehensive market overview rather than specific assets, technical analysis, or portfolio functions.

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 for obtaining a broad market snapshot, which differentiates it from siblings like stock_quote (single asset) or technical_analysis (specific metrics). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use alternatives (e.g., vs. sector_rotation or risk_metrics) or any exclusions.

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