Skip to main content
Glama

Fmp

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Name

search_name
Read-onlyIdempotent

Company-name search.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryYes
exchangeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "Apple"
+  },
+  {
+    "limit": 5,
+    "query": "Microsoft"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. There is no mention of matching behavior, result limits, or how the exchange parameter affects results, so the description provides no value beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single phrase, technically concise, but it is under-specified for a tool with three parameters. This is not efficient brevity; it omits necessary information, making it closer to a tautology than a useful description.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has three parameters, no output schema, and minimal description, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the purpose of limit/exchange or the expected output, leaving significant gaps for an agent to operate correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it only vaguely implies 'query' is a company name. The 'limit' and 'exchange' parameters are not explained at all, leaving their semantics unclear.

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?

The description 'Company-name search' clearly states the tool searches by company name, distinguishing it from search_symbol (likely ticker-based) and search_within. The verb 'search' and resource 'company name' are specific, though terse.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_symbol or search_within. The description does not mention exclusions or contexts where this tool is preferred, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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

All Fmp 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