US Stocks & Market Data

get_financial_statement

Read-onlyIdempotent

[US Stock Info] Get financial statement for a given ticker symbol. You can choose from the following financial statement types: income_stmt, quarterly_income_stmt, balance_sheet, quarterly_balance_sheet, cashflow, quarterly_cashflow.

Args:
    ticker: str
        The ticker symbol of the stock to get financial statement for, e.g. "AAPL"
    financial_type: str
        The type of financial statement to get. You can choose from the following financial statement types: income_stmt, quarterly_income_stmt, balance_sheet, quarterly_balance_sheet, cashflow, quarterly_cashflow.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ticker`	Yes
`financial_type`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the bar for behavioral disclosure is lower. The description adds useful context about the available financial statement types and parameter semantics, but it does not disclose edge-case behavior (e.g., invalid tickers, data currency, or time periods). This is acceptable but not comprehensive.

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 description is reasonably well-structured with a purpose statement and an Args section, but it is repetitive: the list of financial statement types appears twice nearly verbatim (once in the overview and once in the financial_type explanation). This redundancy could be trimmed without losing meaning, making it slightly less concise than ideal.

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?

The tool has only two parameters, both fully explained, and an output schema is present, so return values are documented elsewhere. The annotations cover side effects, and the '[US Stock Info]' prefix indicates the market scope. The description is largely complete, though it does not elaborate on the meaning or typical use of each financial statement type, which is a minor gap given the tool's purpose.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema provides zero description coverage (0%), leaving the description to fully explain the parameters. The description does this thoroughly: it defines 'ticker' with an example ('AAPL') and lists all six allowed values for 'financial_type' (income_stmt, quarterly_income_stmt, etc.). This fully compensates for the schema's lack of detail, giving the agent precise guidance on how to fill each argument.

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 the tool's function: 'Get financial statement for a given ticker symbol' and lists the specific financial statement types available. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_stock_info or get_finance_news, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 the tool (to retrieve financial statements) and enumerates the available statement types, which helps an agent choose the appropriate variant (e.g., income_stmt vs. balance_sheet). However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or provide exclusionary guidance on when not to use it, so it lacks a small amount of directiveness.

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

All US Stocks & Market Data 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

A4.3/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool provides a distinct type of stock data: news, financial statements, historical prices, market overview, recommendations, and stock info. There is no functional overlap between them; the purpose of each is clear and mutually exclusive.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the consistent get_ verb prefix followed by a descriptive resource, such as get_finance_news and get_historical_stock_prices. The naming pattern is uniform and predictable across the entire set.

Tool Count5/5

With six tools, the server is well-scoped for stock and market data retrieval. Each tool covers a major data category without unnecessary duplication, making the count appropriate and manageable.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers key stock data needs including news, financial statements, historical prices, market overview, recommendations, and stock summaries. Missing features like direct quote or sector performance are minor and can be worked around with existing tools.

Resources

Need Help?