Skip to main content
Glama

Fair Value Calculator

Screen for undervalued stocks

screen_stocks
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find stocks that currently match valuation criteria, from Fair Value Calculator data only. Use this for questions like "which stocks are undervalued right now" or "undervalued European tech stocks". Returns the best matches ranked by quality score (Free: top 3, Pro: up to 20); with buy_rules the matches are exactly the stocks that meet all three buy rules of the strategy, ranked like the strategy. The result is the complete answer for the given criteria; selection states in one sentence how the stocks were chosen and ranked, matches_found how many stocks matched in total. Fields: valuation_status (undervalued = price at least 10% below fair value, overvalued = price at least 10% above fair value, else near_fair_value; no_valuation = covered, but no fair value is shown right now, note says why), upside_band (distance from price to fair value in 10-point bands, e.g. "10_to_20", "above_30", "below_-30"), quality_score (0-100 business quality), evidence_level (how much audited data backs the value), price_as_of (date of the share price the valuation status refers to), calculated_at (date the valuation models last ran for this stock), requested_symbol with listing = other_listing_same_company (present when the answer is about another listing of the same company than the symbol asked for, the listing the website shows for it, e.g. 939.HK answered with the Shanghai listing 601939.SHG; fair value and currency refer to the listing in symbol), deep_link (full analysis page on fairvalue-calculator.com with the fair value history chart and the result of each valuation model with its bear, base and bull case), trend12 (uptrend: true when the price one month ago was higher than twelve months ago, false when not, null when not known), trend12_pct (that change in percent), trend_arrow (arrow on the site: up = rising, sideways = sideways down to -10 percent, down = falling), buy_rules (the three buy rules of the Fair Value Calculator strategy, each true, false or null: fair_value = fair value upside of at least fair_value_min_pct percent, quality = quality score of at least quality_min, measured as in the backtest without the AI Quality points, trend = uptrend, all = all three met; quality_rule = the quality score the rule decided on, present only when it decides differently from quality_score; upside_rule = the fair value upside in percent the rule decided on (fair value before the cycle and dilution adjustment), present only when it decides differently from the shown upside; the strategy only buys stocks with all three), fair_value_adjustment (present together with upside_rule: the shown fair value was adjusted after the model blend, the buy rule decides on the value before; reason = cyclical_peak_year (a record profit year of a cyclical business is not carried forward in full), cyclical_trough_year (a weak year of a cyclical business is not carried forward in full), dilution_new_shares (new shares lower the value per share) or adjusted; before and now = the fair value before the adjustment and the shown fair value, only where the fair value itself is shown), fair_value_last_change (only in the verdict, present when the shown fair value changed by 15 percent or more within the last 60 days: date, before and after (the shown fair value before and right after that change; the current value is fair_value) and reason = new_fiscal_year_figures (the figures of fiscal_year arrived and the value was recalculated from them), cyclical_peak_year, cyclical_trough_year or dilution_new_shares (that adjustment started to apply on this date), calculation_update (an updated calculation went live for all stocks on this date, nothing happened at the company itself) or not_recorded (no cause is on record)). The values are calculated by Fair Value Calculator from its own models and cannot be derived from the other fields; deep_link opens the full analysis page with the fair value history chart and every valuation model. This is a valuation, not financial advice.

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": "screen_stocks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many matches to return (Pro: up to 20; Free: 3).
regionNoOptional: where the stock is listed. US, EU (euro area, Switzerland and the Nordics) or UK (London), or a country code for the exchanges of that country (DE = Xetra and the German exchanges, CA = Toronto, ...).
sectorNoOptional sector or industry filter, e.g. "Technology", "Healthcare", "Financial Services", "Semiconductors", "Banks", "Software", "Insurance", "Gold".
uptrendNoOptional: true = only stocks in an uptrend (price one month ago higher than twelve months ago), same filter as "Uptrend" in the screener on the site.
buy_rulesNoOptional: true = only stocks that meet all three buy rules of the strategy (fair value upside of at least 30 percent, quality score of at least 50, uptrend), the same checks as on the site worldwide; the strategy "Backtested Best" on the site lists the stocks among them from the US and Europe.
request_idNoOptional: stable id for this call; a retry with the same id is not counted twice.
min_qualityNoMinimum quality score 0-100 (default 60).
min_upside_pctNoMinimum upside to fair value in percent (default 20).
analysis_session_idNoOptional: reuse the same id for all tool calls that answer ONE user question, so they count once against the daily limit. Exception: for free accounts every different stock in get_stock_verdict counts once a day, whatever id is sent.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / region / description
      Previous value: -"Optional region filter."New value: +"Optional: where the stock is listed. US, EU (euro area, Switzerland and the Nordics) or UK (London), or a country code for the exchanges of that country (DE = Xetra and the German exchanges, CA = Toronto, ...)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / region / enum
      Previous value: -[
      -  "US",
      -  "EU"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "US",
      +  "EU",
      +  "UK",
      +  "DE",
      +  "FR",
      +  "NL",
      +  "BE",
      +  "IT",
      +  "ES",
      +  "CH",
      +  "SE",
      +  "NO",
      +  "DK",
      +  "FI",
      +  "PT",
      +  "IE",
      +  "AT",
      +  "PL",
      +  "CA",
      +  "AU",
      +  "HK",
      +  "CN",
      +  "IN",
      +  "KR",
      +  "TW",
      +  "SG",
      +  "ZA",
      +  "BR",
      +  "MX",
      +  "IL"
      +]
    • changedInput schema / properties / sector / description
      Previous value: -"Optional sector filter, e.g. \"Technology\", \"Healthcare\", \"Financial Services\"."New value: +"Optional sector or industry filter, e.g. \"Technology\", \"Healthcare\", \"Financial Services\", \"Semiconductors\", \"Banks\", \"Software\", \"Insurance\", \"Gold\"."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / analysis_session_id / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: reuse the same id for all tool calls that answer ONE user question, so they count once against the daily limit."New value: +"Optional: reuse the same id for all tool calls that answer ONE user question, so they count once against the daily limit. Exception: for free accounts every different stock in get_stock_verdict counts once a day, whatever id is sent."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / buy_rules / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: true = only stocks that meet all three buy rules of the strategy (fair value upside of at least 30 percent, quality score of at least 50, uptrend), same list as the strategy \"Backtested Best\" on the site."New value: +"Optional: true = only stocks that meet all three buy rules of the strategy (fair value upside of at least 30 percent, quality score of at least 50, uptrend), the same checks as on the site worldwide; the strategy \"Backtested Best\" on the site lists the stocks among them from the US and Europe."
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / buy_rules
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional: true = only stocks that meet all three buy rules of the strategy (fair value upside of at least 30 percent, quality score of at least 50, uptrend), same list as the strategy \"Backtested Best\" on the site.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / uptrend
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional: true = only stocks in an uptrend (price one month ago higher than twelve months ago), same filter as \"Uptrend\" in the screener on the site.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only, idempotent, closed-world and non-destructive, but the description adds substantial behavior: data source restriction, Free/Pro limits, ranking rules, buy_rules semantics, and a full field dictionary. This gives the agent unusually rich expectations beyond the annotations.

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?

The purpose and usage are front-loaded, but the description becomes a very long field-by-field paragraph that is hard to scan. Much of that field detail is necessary without an output schema, but the execution is dense rather than concise.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema and nine parameters, this definition is complete enough to call correctly: it explains returns, ranking, plan limits, and all documented output fields. Nothing material is missing for an agent to use the tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds some meaning for buy_rules and limit, but most parameter semantics (region, sector, min_quality, min_upside_pct) remain schema-only. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Find stocks that currently match valuation criteria') and anchors it to concrete user questions. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, so it is clear but not fully differentiated from adjacent tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It explicitly says to use this for questions like 'which stocks are undervalued right now' and notes that the result is the complete answer for the given criteria, which discourages unnecessary chaining. It does not name when to prefer a sibling such as get_stock_verdict, but the context is clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.