Gemral Edge

Policy Beneficiaries & Exposed Tickers

get_beneficiary_tickers

Retrieve events and policy mandates impacting a specific stock ticker, indicating whether exposure is long-bias (Beneficiary) or short/defensive (Adverse impact).

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": {
      "ticker": "<ticker>"
    },
    "name": "get_beneficiary_tickers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`ticker`	Yes	Stock ticker, e.g. INTC or AAPL

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notice`	No	Free-tier upgrade notice; only when results are masked/delayed.
`results`	Yes	Tool result payload (read-only evidence). Shape varies by tool; scoring weights are never exposed.
`history_limit`	No	Present when the license limits history depth: earliest_allowed date, history_days and how many older items were removed.
`deprecated_fields`	No	Present only while a renamed key is still returned next to its replacement: field (old key), replacement (new key, same value), removal (ISO date after which the old key is gone).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 26, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / deprecated_fields

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Present only while a renamed key is still returned next to its replacement: field (old key), replacement (new key, same value), removal (ISO date after which the old key is gone).",
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description frames the operation as a plain read ('Retrieve events...'), but annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, a direct contradiction of the stated behavior. Beyond that, it discloses nothing about pagination, default/max result counts, or cost of the call.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the key classification (Beneficiary vs Adverse impact) is placed prominently. Nothing is repeated or wasted, though one short clause on usage would be affordable within this length.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Because an output schema exists, return structure need not be described, and the required ticker is covered. Still, the limit parameter is undocumented and the routing relative to sibling policy/exposure tools is missing, leaving gaps for a 2-parameter, open-ended lookup tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 50%: ticker is documented in the schema with examples, but 'limit' (default 10, max 50) has no description anywhere, and the description does not compensate by explaining the count or its effect. The description only restates that a 'specific stock ticker' is required.

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?

Specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve events and policy mandates impacting a specific stock ticker', and it explains the direction semantics of long-bias vs adverse impact. However, the title/name ('Policy Beneficiaries & Exposed Tickers') suggests listing beneficiaries, while the description gives the inverse view (events for a given ticker), so it does not clearly separate itself from siblings like get_policy_affected_companies or get_company_exposure.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No statement of when to use this tool versus get_policy_affected_companies, get_company_exposure, or get_ticker_intelligence, which read as close alternatives. No prerequisites or exclusions are given, so an agent must infer routing from the name alone.

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

All Gemral Edge 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.