local-mcp

Stocks Get Chart

stocks_get_chart

Read-only

Gets historical price data for a stock symbol. Range: 1d, 5d, 1mo, 3mo, 6mo, 1y, 2y, 5y, 10y, ytd, max.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`range`	No	Time range (default: 1mo)
`symbol`	Yes	Ticker symbol, e.g. AAPL
`interval`	No	Data interval (default: 1d). Intraday (1m–90m) needs a short range.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`range`	No
`symbol`	No
`candles`	No
`currency`	No
`interval`	No
`change_pct`	No
`data_points`	No
`current_price`	No

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no additional behavioral traits beyond the range values, which are also present in the schema. There are no side effects disclosed, but none are expected for a read-only market data tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by the range options. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the rich schema with all parameters documented, enums, and defaults, plus an output schema, the description is complete enough. It clearly states the core function and key range options without needing to explain return values or parameter details.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, enums, and defaults. The description merely repeats the range enum values, adding no new semantic depth. The interval parameter's constraint ('Intraday needs a short range') is already in the schema's description, not the tool description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it gets historical price data for a stock symbol, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like stocks_get_quote (current quote) and stocks_search_symbol (symbol lookup), as historical data is explicitly mentioned.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool (when historical price data is needed) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions such as using stocks_get_quote for current prices. However, the historical vs. quote distinction is implied.

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

All local-mcp tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are clearly distinct per app (e.g., chrome_*, safari_*, m365_*), but there is notable overlap between generic file tools like `file_list` and `finder_list`, both listing files; `search_contacts` and `list_contacts` serve similar purposes; `report_friction` and `report_problem` both send feedback to the team. The large number of tools with similar purposes in different domains creates moderate ambiguity for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is very consistent overall: most tools follow a `{app}_action` or `verb_noun` pattern (e.g., `chrome_click`, `create_calendar_event`, `list_reminders`). There are minor deviations like `lmcp_install_upgrade` (two verbs) and `complete_omnifocus_task` vs. `complete_reminder` (inconsistent verb placement). Still, the pattern is predictable and readable across the full set.

Tool Count2/5

With 225 tools, the surface is extremely large and heavy. While it covers many distinct domains (browsers, mail, calendar, files, notes, reminders, video editing, web automation, etc.), the sheer number makes it hard to navigate and likely includes many rarely-used tools. This is far beyond the well-scoped range of 3-15 tools and feels excessive even for a 'local everything' MCP server.

Completeness3/5

For many app integrations, the tool set provides solid CRUD coverage (e.g., Calendar has create, read, update, delete; Apple Notes has create, read, update, list, search; OmniFocus has create, list, search, complete). However, some areas are incomplete: for example, there is no tool to create a new Mail folder or delete notes. The 'web' tools lack a clear update/delete for saved sessions. The suite is broad but has notable gaps within individual domains.

Stocks Get Chart

Input Schema

Output Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources