get_financial_prices_snapshotGet the real-time price snapshot for a stock, including the current price, day change, and day change percent.
Published reference price: $0.02 USD per successful request. Account-specific pricing and final settlement may differ.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ticker | Yes | The stock ticker symbol (e.g. AAPL, MSFT). |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[]New value: +[
+ "ticker"
+]Input schema / properties / ticker / descriptionAdded value: +"The stock ticker symbol (e.g. AAPL, MSFT)."Input schema / properties / ticker / descriptionRemoved value: -"The stock ticker symbol (e.g. AAPL, MSFT)."Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "ticker"
-]New value: +[]Input schema / properties / ticker / descriptionAdded value: +"The stock ticker symbol (e.g. AAPL, MSFT)."Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[]New value: +[
+ "ticker"
+]Input schema / properties / ticker / descriptionRemoved value: -"The stock ticker symbol (e.g. AAPL, MSFT)."Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "ticker"
-]New value: +[]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world access, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely valuable behavioral context the annotations cannot: a published cost of $0.02 USD per successful request and that settlement may vary by account. It does not discuss rate limits or data freshness besides 'real-time'.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The functional content is a single well front-loaded sentence. The injected pricing block with HTML comment markers adds some visual noise, though the pricing fact itself is useful and confined to a short trailing paragraph.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the single parameter is fully specified in the schema. For a one-argument read tool, the description plus annotations plus pricing note cover everything an agent needs to select and call it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with a single required 'ticker' parameter that the schema already documents with examples. The description adds no format, exchange-suffix, or case-sensitivity guidance beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get the real-time price snapshot for a stock') and enumerates the returned fields (current price, day change, day change percent). The word 'snapshot' plus 'real-time' implicitly separates it from the historical get_financial_prices sibling, but no sibling is named explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is only implied: 'real-time' suggests a point-in-time quote rather than a historical series, which is presumably why one would pick this over get_financial_prices or batch_quote. No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.