Fetch real-time quote fields for a single Yahoo Finance symbol like AAPL, returning regularMarketPrice and other data in a quotes list.
Yahoo Finance ticker quote. Returns fast quote fields for one Yahoo Finance symbol such as AAPL, for example regularMarketPrice, in a quotes list alongside the requested symbols. The symbol is the only input.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Yahoo Finance symbol such as AAPL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It indicates a read-style return via 'Returns' and mentions a `quotes` list, but does not disclose data freshness/delay, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior.
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 three compact sentences and front-loads the core purpose. It is efficient, though the phrase 'alongside the requested `symbols`' is slightly awkward for a one-symbol input.
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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description gives the output container (`quotes`) and an example field, which is useful. It remains incomplete on data timing, alternatives, and other behavioral expectations.
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% and the single parameter is already documented in the schema as a Yahoo Finance symbol such as AAPL. The description reinforces that the symbol is the only input and gives an example, but adds little beyond the schema.
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 states a specific operation: returning Yahoo Finance ticker quote fields for a single symbol, with examples like `regularMarketPrice`. It is clear enough to distinguish from generic search, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling quote/info/history tools.
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?
It implies a quick quote use case with 'fast quote fields' but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and does not name alternatives such as ticker_info or ticker_history. The agent must infer selection from the tool name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.