Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

google_finance_financials

Retrieve annual and quarterly Google Finance financial statements for a quote such as AAPL:NASDAQ, including revenue, net income, EBITDA, EPS, margins, cash flow, assets, liabilities, and equity.

Instructions

Google Finance financial statements. Returns the financial statements Google Finance holds for a quote such as AAPL:NASDAQ, as annual and quarterly rows plus a currency. Each row has revenue, net income, EBITDA, EPS, margins, cash flow, assets, liabilities and equity. The rows are empty when Google Finance has no statement data for the quote.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quoteYesQuote identifier such as AAPL:NASDAQ

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses the return shape (annual and quarterly rows plus currency), enumerates row fields (revenue, net income, EBITDA, EPS, margins, cash flow, assets, liabilities, equity), and states the edge case that rows are empty when no data exists. It omits auth/rate-limit details, but for a read-only data fetch this is solid disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then return structure, fields, and edge case. No wasted clauses, though slightly dense field enumeration.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the return shape and the empty-data behavior an agent needs to interpret results. Only routing to alternatives is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented with the same AAPL:NASDAQ example used in the description. The description adds no meaning 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.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource: returns Google Finance financial statements for a quote, with annual/quarterly rows and a currency. The resource (financial statements) is distinguishable from quote/chart/news siblings, though it never names a sibling to route away from.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use or when-not guidance. It doesn't distinguish this from the many sibling tools (google_finance_quote, yahoo_finance_ticker_financials, sec_financials) or state the prerequisite that the quote must be a valid identifier. Usage is only inferable from the description.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools