schwab-mcp

schwab_get_brokerage_positions

Get current positions in the active Schwab account, with automatic vertical-spread detection.

Pulls Schwab's account endpoint with fields="positions" and emits up to three markdown sections, omitting any that are empty:

Spreads — vertical spreads detected from paired option legs:

- <underlying> <spread_type> (<short_strike>/<long_strike> P|C exp <date>,
  DTE <n>) | Credit: $X | Max Loss: $Y | Current: $Z | P&L: $W

Options (unmatched) — single legs not paired into a spread:

- <underlying> <strike> P|C exp <date> (DTE <n>) | Qty: ±N | Avg: $X |
  MktVal: $Y | P&L: $Z

- <symbol> | Qty: ±N | Avg: $X | Price: $Y | P&L: $Z

Quantities are computed as (longQuantity − shortQuantity) — short positions show as negative numbers in Qty.

Spread detection is heuristic: legs of the same underlying with matching expiration and put/call type, opposite long/short direction, and adjacent strikes get paired. Anything that doesn't fit cleanly drops into Options (unmatched). The tool does not currently detect iron condors, butterflies, or calendars — those will appear as multiple Options (unmatched) rows.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`npub`	No	Required. Your Nostr public key (npub1...) for credit billing.
`dpop_token`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description provides thorough behavioral details: it pulls from a specific endpoint, emits three markdown sections with structured output, explains quantity computation (longQuantity - shortQuantity), and describes the heuristic for spread detection, including its limitations (no iron condors, butterflies, calendars).

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections and examples, making it easy to parse. However, it is somewhat lengthy; some sentences could be streamlined without losing information.

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 presence of an output schema, the description still covers output format in detail (three sections with explanations). It addresses spread detection heuristic and limitations, making it complete for a positions tool. No required parameters are documented in the description, but the schema indicates none are required.

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 50% (npub described, dpop_token not). The description does not elaborate on these parameters, relying on the schema's minimal descriptions. No added meaning for dpop_token, and npub is briefly restated. The output format is detailed, but parameter semantics are neglected.

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 retrieves current positions with automatic vertical-spread detection. It specifies the resource ('active Schwab account') and distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on balances, orders, or other data.

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?

The description implies usage for viewing positions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., schwab_get_brokerage_balances, schwab_get_brokerage_orders). No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations are provided.

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

All schwab-mcp tools Inspect

Try in Browser