market-data-mcp

market_scan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Scan up to 25 stock symbols and rank them by absolute percentage change to identify the biggest movers in your watchlist.

Instructions

Scan a watchlist of stocks and rank them by absolute % change (biggest movers first).

Accepts up to 25 symbols. Unknown or delisted tickers are skipped gracefully. Useful for monitoring a portfolio or sector basket for unusual activity.

Args: params: symbols (comma-separated string, max 25) and response_format.

Examples: - "Which of AAPL, MSFT, GOOGL, AMZN, META is moving most today?" -> symbols='AAPL,MSFT,GOOGL,AMZN,META' - "Scan my tech watchlist: NVDA,AMD,INTC,TSM,AVGO" -> symbols='NVDA,AMD,INTC,TSM,AVGO' - "Show biggest movers in AAPL TSLA MSFT today" -> symbols='AAPL,TSLA,MSFT'

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": {
      "params": "<params>"
    },
    "name": "market_scan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds important behavior: ranking by % change, accepting up to 25 symbols, and gracefully skipping unknown/delisted tickers. Complements annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) without contradiction.

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?

Concise with clear structure: purpose, constraints, then bulleted examples. No wasted words.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity, annotations, and output schema existence, the description fully informs the agent about behavior, constraints, and usage context.

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?

The description repeats the max 25 symbols constraint already in the schema, but adds helpful examples. Schema coverage is effectively high due to nested parameter descriptions, so the description adds marginal semantic value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool scans a watchlist and ranks by absolute % change, distinguishing it from siblings like market_quote or market_analyze.

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?

Explicitly mentions it's useful for monitoring portfolios or sector baskets, and provides multiple examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives.

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

Deploy Server