Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
polygon-mcp

polygon-mcp

by atomcp-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

options_get_snapshot

Retrieve a snapshot of an option contract's current market data by providing the underlying and option symbols.

Instructions

Get snapshot for an option contract.

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": {
      "underlying_symbol": "<underlying_symbol>",
      "option_symbol": "<option_symbol>"
    },
    "name": "options_get_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
option_symbolYes
underlying_symbolYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose safety and behavioral traits. It only says 'Get snapshot', implying a read, but does not describe data returned, authentication, rate limits, or whether the snapshot is real-time. This is a significant transparency gap.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

A single sentence is tight and readable, but it under-specifies rather than being concise. It earns a moderate score for structure.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool lacks an output schema, and the description does not state what a snapshot contains (e.g., bid/ask, volume, Greeks). For a tool with many closely named siblings, this is incomplete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema provides only parameter names with no descriptions; coverage is 0%. The description does not explain the format of option_symbol (e.g., OCC symbol) or the relationship between underlying_symbol and option_symbol, so it fails to compensate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('snapshot for an option contract'), clearly identifying the tool's function. However, it does not distinguish this from other snapshot/option tools beyond the name, and 'snapshot' is not defined.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like options_get_quotes, options_get_last_trade, or reference_get_option_contract. The description gives no context for selection.

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