Skip to main content
Glama

Price

price
Read-onlyIdempotent

Twelve Data latest trade price for a single symbol (stock, forex, crypto, ETF). Returns a single numeric price field. Lightest endpoint for current-price lookups.

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").
exchangeNoOptional exchange filter (e.g. "NASDAQ", "NYSE", "Binance").

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoResponse code
statusNoResponse status
messageNoResponse message

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by noting it returns only a single numeric field and is the 'lightest endpoint,' providing performance context beyond what annotations offer.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences that immediately state the tool's purpose, scope, return format, and performance characteristic. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the output schema exists and description matches the single numeric field return, it is largely complete. However, the batch capability mismatch limits completeness, as agents might incorrectly assume only single symbols are accepted.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. However, the description states 'single symbol' while the schema's symbol parameter explicitly allows comma-separated batch queries (e.g., 'AAPL,MSFT'). This contradiction misrepresents parameter capabilities, reducing clarity.

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?

Clearly states it returns the latest trade price for a single symbol across multiple asset types. Highlights it's the 'lightest endpoint' for current-price lookups, distinguishing it from heavier endpoints. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like 'quote' or 'stocks'.

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?

Implied usage via 'lightest endpoint for current-price lookups' suggests using when only a price is needed. No explicit when-not or alternative tools mentioned, leaving room for ambiguity among sibling tools.

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

Try in Browser

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.