Yahoo Finance MCP Server

get_insider_activity

Read-only

Retrieve insider trading activity for a stock, including individual transactions, a 6-month buy/sell summary, and the current insider roster.

Instructions

Get insider trading activity for a Yahoo symbol.

Returns individual insider transactions, a 6-month purchases/sales summary, and the current insider roster. Equity-only: an ETF, fund or crypto symbol answers with an error that says so.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Maximum number of insider transactions/roster rows to return.
`symbol`	Yes	A Yahoo ticker or an ISIN, e.g. 'AAPL', 'SAP.DE' or 'US0378331005'. For a company name, use 'search' first.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.0Oct 1, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / symbol / maxLength
```
Added value: +32
```

Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0Aug 18, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / symbol / description

Previous value: -"A native Yahoo Finance ticker symbol, e.g. 'AAPL', 'MSFT', 'SAP.DE', or 'BMW.DE'. This is NOT an ISIN, a WKN, or a company name, and must NOT be built by appending an exchange suffix to an ISIN (e.g. 'US0378331005.DE' is invalid). If you only have a name or ISIN, call the 'search' tool first and pass the 'symbol' value it returns."New value: +"A Yahoo ticker or an ISIN, e.g. 'AAPL', 'SAP.DE' or 'US0378331005'. For a company name, use 'search' first."

First observedv0.2.2Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), and the description adds value beyond them: the three-part return shape and the equity-only failure mode. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but the output schema handles return structure, so the remaining gap is minor.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose, then return contents, then the constraint. Front-loaded and every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

With an output schema and full parameter coverage, the description only needs to supply the routing constraint, which it does via the equity-only caveat. Only the sibling differentiation (vs. get_holders) 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%, so both parameters (symbol formats, ISIN, limit bounds) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond it, which is the baseline-3 case.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Get insider trading activity for a Yahoo symbol') plus an enumeration of the three outputs (individual transactions, 6-month summary, roster). Clear enough to distinguish from get_quote/get_holders by content, though it never names the institutional-holder sibling it is most likely to be confused with.

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?

Gives a real usage constraint: equity-only, with an explicit error for ETF/fund/crypto symbols, and the schema points company-name lookups to 'search' first. No explicit when-to-prefer-this-over-alternatives statement, so it stops just short of 5.

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