Track the financial trades made by U.S. House members and their families with the FMP U.S. House Trades API. Access real-time information on stock sales, purchases, and other investment activities to gain insight into their financial decisions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Stock symbol |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'real-time information' and the types of trades, but does not state whether it returns a list, how the symbol parameter filters results, any authentication requirements, or potential limitations. The language is promotional ('gain insight') rather than descriptive.
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 concise at two sentences and identifies the core purpose. However, the second sentence includes the phrase 'to gain insight into their financial decisions', which is somewhat redundant and adds little operational value.
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?
The tool is simple with one parameter, and the description adequately conveys the domain. However, it fails to mention that the tool filters by stock symbol, which is a key operational detail. Given the absence of an output schema, the description could be more complete by describing the expected return structure.
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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single 'symbol' parameter described as 'Stock symbol'. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so the baseline score 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 that the tool tracks financial trades made by U.S. House members and their families, distinguishing it from Senate trade tools. However, it does not explicitly mention the 'by symbol' aspect that differentiates it from the sibling tool 'getHouseTradesByName'.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like getHouseTradesByName or getLatestHouseDisclosures. The description only implies a general use case ('gain insight into their financial decisions') without any explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.
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.