Access comprehensive shares float data for all available companies with the FMP All Shares Float API. Retrieve critical information such as free float, float shares, and outstanding shares to analyze liquidity across a wide range of companies.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number (default: 0) | |
| limit | No | Limit on number of results (default: 1000, max: 5000) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explain pagination behavior, response format, or any rate limits/limitations, even though page and limit parameters exist in the schema. The description only lists return fields, which is purpose information rather than behavioral transparency.
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 description is two sentences long and immediately states the tool's core function. Every clause adds value, naming the data source, the returned fields, and the analytical use case without any filler.
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?
For a simple bulk data retrieval tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the essential purpose and core fields, but lacks guidance on pagination usage, output shape, or potential caveats. It is adequate but leaves the agent inferring how results are structured and how to page through large datasets.
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?
The input schema provides 100% coverage for both parameters with descriptions for page and limit. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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?
The description clearly states the tool accesses comprehensive shares float data for all available companies, which distinguishes it from the sibling getShareFloat tool. It names the specific resource and scope (all companies), and the term 'retrieve critical information' with field examples establishes a concrete purpose.
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?
The phrase 'for all available companies' and 'wide range of companies' clearly implies bulk usage, distinguishing it from a single-symbol tool like getShareFloat. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name an alternative for individual company lookups, stopping short of the highest rating.
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.