Retrieve the market capitalization for a specific company on any given date using the FMP Company Market Capitalization API. This API provides essential data to assess the size and value of a company in the stock market, helping users gauge its overall market standing.
| 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?
The description claims the tool retrieves market cap 'on any given date', but the input schema only includes a 'symbol' parameter with no date field. This is misleading and contradicts the actual capabilities. No behavioral details such as output format, permissions, or limitations are disclosed, and with no annotations the description carries the full burden.
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 only two sentences, but the second sentence is generic filler about assessing size and value that adds no actionable information. It is concise in length but not every sentence earns its place.
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?
Despite being a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fails to explain what the response looks like, how the date is handled (if at all), or any caveats. The mismatch between the claims and the schema leaves the agent without complete guidance.
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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds a misleading 'any given date' notion not reflected in the schema. It does not provide any additional meaning for the symbol parameter beyond the schema's minimal 'Stock symbol' description, and the false date capability actively detracts.
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 retrieves market capitalization for a specific company using the FMP API. The verb 'Retrieve' and resource are specific, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like getHistoricalMarketCap or getBatchMarketCap, so it misses the top score.
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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for historical market cap on any date, but it does not mention exclusions or compare with similar sibling tools such as getHistoricalMarketCap or getBatchMarketCap.
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.