K-Stock MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_financials

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve key financial statement accounts—assets, liabilities, equity, revenue, operating income, and net income—for Korean stocks from DART by symbol, year, and report type.

Instructions

Key financial statement accounts (assets, liabilities, equity, revenue, operating income, net income) from DART.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	No	Fiscal year (2015+). Default: last year
`report`	No	annual, q1, half, or q3	annual
`symbol`	Yes	6-character stock code (preferred) or exact company name
`consolidated`	No	Prefer consolidated statements (falls back to separate)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 19, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the data source 'DART'; it says nothing about fallback behavior (consolidated vs separate, hinted only in the schema), rate limits, coverage limits, or how missing years/periods behave.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single, front-loaded sentence with no padding or repetition. It is efficient, though it spends its entire budget on return values rather than on usage or behavior.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With an output schema present and rich annotations, the description does not need to explain return shape, but it also never explains the interaction between report period (q1/half/q3 vs annual) and the returned accounts, which is the main ambiguity an agent faces. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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 year, report, symbol, and consolidated are all documented in the schema itself. The description contributes nothing to parameter meaning; the enumerated accounts are return-value content, not parameters, 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?

Names the specific resource (key financial statement accounts) and enumerates the exact line items returned, plus the data source (DART), so an agent knows this is a fundamentals/statements fetch. It does not differentiate itself from close siblings like get_balance or get_disclosure, leaving potential overlap unresolved.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as get_balance or get_disclosure. The agent must infer usage purely from the resource name.

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

Deploy Server