SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

FDIC-insured bank institutions in one US state

finance_fdic_bank

Read-only

FDIC-insured bank institutions in one US state from the FDIC BankFind API: name, certificate number, address, ZIP, charter class and whether the bank is active. Institution data only; no financial statements. Related tools on this server, for a different need: finance_ffiec_bank_institutions when you need US FDIC-insured banks: name, FDIC cert, Fed RSSD ID; finance_asian_dev_bank_data when you need Asian Development Bank financing from ADB's official IATI. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "state": "<state>"
    },
    "name": "finance_fdic_bank"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	How many institutions, 1 to 50 (default 10)
`state`	Yes	US state name as FDIC writes it, e.g. Maine, California

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`state`	No
`total`	No
`source`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`institutions`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, open-world profile; the description adds real value beyond them by scoping the data ('Institution data only; no financial statements') and disclosing the x402 payment model, per-call price, and that failed calls are free. It does not mention pagination behavior or that limit caps at 50, which is left to the schema.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then the exclusion, then alternatives, then pricing — a sensible order with no filler. The pricing sentence and dual sibling list make it longer than strictly necessary, but each part carries information an agent needs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, yet the description helpfully names key returned fields. Combined with the data-boundary statement and cost disclosure, the definition is essentially complete for a two-parameter lookup tool; only rate-limit or pagination notes are absent.

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 the schema already documents both parameters, including the 1–50 limit range and the state-name format. The description only reinforces the single-state scope ('one US state') without adding format or edge-case guidance beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource ('FDIC-insured bank institutions'), a precise scope ('in one US state'), and the source API, then enumerates the fields returned. It explicitly excludes financial statements and names the sibling tool that covers a near-identical resource, so an agent can distinguish it without opening a schema.

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?

Gives explicit routing: use finance_ffiec_bank_institutions for FDIC-insured banks with Fed RSSD IDs, and finance_asian_dev_bank_data for ADB financing. The guidance is clear but the ffiec alternative overlaps heavily ('US FDIC-insured banks'), leaving the agent to infer that the RSSD ID is the deciding factor rather than stating it outright.

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

All SiteCheck Crypto & Finance 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?