Skip to main content
Glama

Twelvedata

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Dividends

dividends
Read-onlyIdempotent

Twelve Data historical dividends for a stock / ETF symbol: ex-date, amount, frequency. Use for income analysis and dividend-capture strategies on Twelve-Data-covered symbols.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolYesTicker/symbol. Stocks e.g. "AAPL", "MSFT"; forex "EUR/USD"; crypto "BTC/USD"; ETFs "SPY"; indices "IXIC". Comma-separate for a batch (e.g. "AAPL,MSFT").
end_dateNoOptional end of range, "YYYY-MM-DD" or "YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS".
exchangeNoOptional exchange filter (e.g. "NASDAQ", "NYSE", "Binance").
start_dateNoOptional start of range, "YYYY-MM-DD" or "YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoResponse code
statusNoResponse status
messageNoResponse message

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds that data is historical and from Twelve Data, but doesn't discuss behavior on missing symbols or rate limits. The added value is moderate.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with source and resource, no fluff. Every sentence adds value: first identifies tool, second states purpose.

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?

Output schema exists (not shown but context confirms), so description need not detail returns. It does summarize key return fields. It covers the main purpose and constraints (Twelve Data coverage). Lacks mention of pagination or limits, but acceptable for this tool's simplicity.

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 baseline 3. The description does not add meaning to parameters; it only mentions return fields (ex-date, amount, frequency). No additional parameter context beyond schema.

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 uses specific verb 'historical dividends' for a 'stock/ETF symbol', lists key fields (ex-date, amount, frequency), and states use cases, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like earnings or splits.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use for income analysis and dividend-capture strategies', providing clear context. Could be improved by explicitly mentioning when not to use or naming alternatives, but the implied usage is clear given the sibling tools.

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

All Twelvedata toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

While many tools have distinct purposes, there is notable overlap between price, quote, eod, and time_series for price data. Also, the multiple ask_pipeworx variants and deep_research could cause confusion about which to use for factual queries. Some tools like bet_research and polymarket_arbitrage also have overlapping domains.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a descriptive snake_case pattern (ai_visibility_check, ask_pipeworx, compare_entities). A few are single words (cryptocurrencies, indices, profile) which is acceptable. No mixing of camelCase or other conventions, so consistent overall.

Tool Count2/5

47 tools is quite high for a single server. While the domain is broad (financial data, prediction markets, SEC filings, etc.), many tools are highly specific (e.g., polymarket_arbitrage, bet_research, scan_dependency) and could be consolidated. The count feels bloated and adds cognitive load.

Completeness4/5

The tool set is impressively comprehensive, covering stocks, forex, crypto, economic data, SEC filings, prediction markets, entity resolution, and even claims validation. Minor gaps exist (e.g., limited drug data despite having some tools), but overall the surface supports a wide range of agentic workflows without obvious missing operations.

Resources