Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

yahoo_finance_screener

Run predefined Yahoo Finance screeners by ID to retrieve matching quotes, totals, and metadata. Page, sort, and filter results for day gainers, most actives, and other market lists.

Instructions

Yahoo Finance predefined screener results. Runs a predefined Yahoo Finance screener by id, such as day_gainers or most_actives. count and offset page the results; sort_field and sort_asc change the order. The response has the screener title, description, total, meta and the matching quotes. Valid ids come from /yahoo-finance/screeners.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesPredefined screener id
countNoResult count
offsetNoResult offset
sort_ascNoSort ascending
sort_fieldNoSort field for offset/customized runs

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that `count`/`offset` page results, `sort_field`/`sort_asc` change order, and the response contains `title`, `description`, `total`, `meta`, and `quotes`. It does not address auth, rate limits, or default values, but for a read-only screener this is substantial behavioral context.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is four tight sentences, front-loading the primary purpose and then covering parameter behavior, response shape, and id sourcing. Every sentence contributes useful information with no redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema and no annotations, the description fills the gaps: it names the return fields, explains pagination and sorting, and points to the sibling resource that supplies valid ids. This is enough for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning beyond the schema labels: it explains that `count` and `offset` perform paging and that `sort_field` and `sort_asc` control ordering, and it gives example values for `id`.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Runs a predefined Yahoo Finance screener by `id`.' It gives concrete example ids (`day_gainers`, `most_actives`) and the word 'predefined' implicitly distinguishes it from the custom screener sibling.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives a clear prerequisite: valid ids come from `/yahoo-finance/screeners`. That tells the agent when the tool is usable, but it never explicitly names the alternative (`yahoo_finance_screener_custom`) or states when not to use this tool.

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