Yahoo Finance MCP Server

get_upgrades_downgrades

Read-only

Retrieve recent analyst rating changes for a stock symbol, showing each firm's upgrade or downgrade with from/to grades. Use it to track shifting analyst sentiment on equities.

Instructions

Get recent analyst rating changes (upgrades/downgrades) for a Yahoo symbol.

Each entry is a firm's rating change with the from/to grade and action, most recent first. 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 rating changes 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

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds genuine behavioral context on top: entries are firm-level rating changes with from/to grade and action, ordered most recent first, and non-equity symbols return an explicit error. It does not mention rate limits or data staleness, but the added context is substantive.

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 first, entry structure second, failure mode last. No filler and nothing redundant.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be re-explained, and the description still sketches the entry shape. With annotations covering the safety profile and a fully documented schema, the definition is nearly complete; only the sibling boundary with get_recommendations is left unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both 'symbol' (including ISIN and suffix formats, plus the search fallback) and 'limit' (bounds and default) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'recent analyst rating changes (upgrades/downgrades) for a Yahoo symbol', and clarifies the entry shape and ordering. The equity-only constraint is useful, but it never distinguishes itself from the close sibling get_recommendations, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The 'Equity-only' note implies when the tool fails, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or pointer to get_recommendations/search for adjacent cases. Usage is only implied by the phrasing 'recent analyst rating changes'.

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