List available tickers, optionally filtered by asset class.
The full universe is very large, so the MCP server
caps the returned list and marks it ``truncated_by_mcp`` — pass
asset_class to narrow it, or use search_tickers to resolve a specific
asset by name.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| asset_class | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses the truncation behavior and the truncated_by_mcp marker, which is critical for agent understanding.
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?
Concise two-sentence description with front-loaded purpose. Could be slightly more structured, but no wasted words.
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 output schema exists and the description covers truncation and sibling tool differentiation, it provides complete context for effective use.
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?
Schema coverage is 0%, but the single optional parameter 'asset_class' is self-explanatory and the description mentions its purpose. High coverage not required for one simple param.
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 lists available tickers with optional filtering by asset class, and distinguishes it from search_tickers which resolves specific assets by name.
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?
Explicitly advises to use asset_class to narrow results or switch to search_tickers for specific assets, providing clear context for when to use this tool over alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.