FinChiefs research

Search research publications

search_research

Read-only

Research publications (articles, reports, podcasts) with title, provider, date, a short description and the link to the original. Ranked by how well the terms match (title matches count most), then newest; pages via offset / next_offset. Follow the link for the full text where the publisher allows it.

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": "search_research"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	No
`limit`	No	Items per page, at most 100. Default 25.
`since`	No	Start date YYYY-MM-DD. Default: 30 days ago. The free plan reaches back 7 days for individual items.
`terms`	No	Subject words to match (assets, tickers, countries, central banks, companies, themes). Whole-word, case-insensitive; any term may match. Include synonyms and tickers, e.g. ["gold", "xau", "bullion"]. Omit to get everything in range. Matched against title and description.
`until`	No	End date YYYY-MM-DD, inclusive. Default: today.
`offset`	No	Skip this many items; pass the previous response's next_offset to read the next page.
`provider_id`	No	Limit to one research provider (id from list_providers).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: ranking order (title matches weigh most, then newest), offset/next_offset paging, and the caveat that full text is only reachable 'where the publisher allows it' — a real limitation worth knowing.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three compact sentences with no filler; result contents come first, then ranking/paging, then the full-text caveat. The opening is a noun phrase rather than a verb, but it front-loads the useful information effectively.

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 right job of listing returned fields and explaining pagination and ranking. It is nearly complete for a 7-param, all-optional search tool, with the main remaining gap being how it relates to the sibling search/view tools.

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 86%, so the schema already documents limit, since, until, offset, terms, and provider_id thoroughly (including defaults and the free-plan 7-day reach). The description only reinforces paging (offset/next_offset) and title-weighted matching, adding little beyond structured data.

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 names a specific resource and enumerates what it returns (articles, reports, podcasts with title, provider, date, description, link), and the ranking/pagination language makes the search behavior clear. However, it never distinguishes this tool from the sibling view-search tools (search_asset_views, search_macro_views, get_policy_signals), which an agent must choose between.

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 through the ranking and paging notes and the reference to list_providers for provider_id, but there is no explicit statement of when to pick this over the sibling search tools or what the terms-vs-date-only tradeoff is. The agent must infer that this covers publications broadly while siblings cover asset/macro views.

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

All FinChiefs research tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?