Real-time Stock MCP Service

get_billboard_data

Retrieves Chinese stock market billboard data for a given trade date, including stock details, price movements, and capital flow analysis, returned as a formatted table.

Instructions

获取指定交易日的龙虎榜数据，包括股票基本信息、行情数据、资金流向等。

Args: trade_date: 交易日期，格式为 YYYY-MM-DD。 page_size: 返回数据条数，默认为10条。

Returns: 格式化的龙虎榜数据，以Markdown表格形式展示

Examples: - get_billboard_data("2025-11-28") - get_billboard_data("2025-11-28", 20)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "trade_date": "<trade_date>"
    },
    "name": "get_billboard_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`trade_date`	Yes
`page_size`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.1May 17, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the return format (Markdown table) but omits behavioral traits like data freshness, authentication, or side effects. It doesn't disclose that this is a read operation.

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?

Description is concise and well-structured with Args, Returns, and Examples sections. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the return format (Markdown table) but could elaborate on the exact fields returned.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description adds format for 'trade_date' (YYYY-MM-DD) and default value for 'page_size', providing meaningful context beyond the schema types.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves billboard data for a specified trading day, including basic info and fund flow. It uses a specific verb and resource, but doesn't differentiate from the sibling 'get_stock_billboard_data'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like 'get_stock_billboard_data'. Examples show typical usage, but no context for when-not-to-use or prerequisites.

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