Skip to main content
Glama

Fdic

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Fdic Failures

fdic_failures
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search FDIC bank failures by date range. Returns bank name, location, CERT ID, failure date, acquiring institution, and fund type, reconciled against FDIC's published Failed Bank List with a data_as_of date and a warning field when FDIC's own search index is lagging.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of failure records to return (default 20)
end_dateNoEnd date filter — MM/DD/YYYY ("12/31/2023"), YYYY-MM-DD, or a bare year ("2023")
start_dateNoStart date filter — MM/DD/YYYY ("01/01/2023"), YYYY-MM-DD, or a bare year ("2023")

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filtersYes
failuresYesList of bank failures
total_failuresYesTotal number of bank failures in result set

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / end_date / description
      Previous value: -"End date filter in MM/DD/YYYY format (e.g., \"12/31/2023\")"New value: +"End date filter — MM/DD/YYYY (\"12/31/2023\"), YYYY-MM-DD, or a bare year (\"2023\")"
    • changedInput schema / properties / start_date / description
      Previous value: -"Start date filter in MM/DD/YYYY format (e.g., \"01/01/2023\")"New value: +"Start date filter — MM/DD/YYYY (\"01/01/2023\"), YYYY-MM-DD, or a bare year (\"2023\")"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "failures": {
+      "description": "List of bank failures",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "acquiring_institution": {
+            "description": "Institution that acquired the failed bank",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "cert": {
+            "description": "FDIC certificate number",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "city": {
+            "description": "City location",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "failure_date": {
+            "description": "Date of bank failure",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "fund": {
+            "description": "Insurance fund type",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Bank name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "state": {
+            "description": "State code",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "total_assets": {
+            "description": "Total assets at time of failure",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "total_deposits": {
+            "description": "Total deposits at time of failure",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "filters": {
+      "properties": {
+        "end_date": {
+          "description": "End date filter applied",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "start_date": {
+          "description": "Start date filter applied",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "total_failures": {
+      "description": "Total number of bank failures in result set",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "total_failures",
+    "filters",
+    "failures"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 10
+  },
+  {
+    "end_date": "12/31/2023",
+    "limit": 20,
+    "start_date": "01/01/2023"
+  }
+]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description adds real behavioral context: results are reconciled against FDIC's published Failed Bank List, carry a data_as_of date, and include a warning field when FDIC's search index lags. That freshness caveat is exactly the kind of trait annotations cannot express. It still omits pagination/truncation behavior.

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 leading with the verb and resource, with the data-quality caveat placed after. Dense but nearly every clause earns its place; slightly long for a three-parameter search tool.

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 the return fields and caveat fields did not need spelling out, yet the description is complete for invocation and even flags data-freshness risk. The only gap is lack of any guidance about result volume or when to reach for a sibling tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (limit, start_date, end_date) and their accepted date formats are already documented in the schema. The description repeats 'by date range' without adding format syntax or edge-case semantics, so the baseline of 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?

Specific verb + resource + scope: 'Search FDIC bank failures by date range', and it names the returned fields (bank name, CERT ID, failure date, acquiring institution, fund type). This clearly separates it from siblings like fdic_financials, fdic_get_institution, and fdic_search_institutions.

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 date-range scoping implies when the tool fits (historical failure lookups across a period), but it never states when to prefer it over fdic_search_institutions or fdic_get_institution, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is inferable but not guided.

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

All Fdic toolsInspect
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