Skip to main content
Glama
haiyunsky

HPSILab - Quant Finance MCP Server for Stock Analysis and Options Analytics

get_monte_carlo

Run a Monte Carlo simulation to generate probabilistic price ranges and quantify downside risk for a stock over a 30-day horizon.

Instructions

Run a Monte Carlo price-path simulation for a stock over a 30-day horizon.

Use this tool when:

  • You need a probabilistic price range rather than a single point estimate.

  • You want to quantify downside risk (e.g., probability of a 10 % drawdown).

  • You are sizing a position using a volatility-adjusted scenario.

The simulation uses a GBM (Geometric Brownian Motion) model calibrated with the stock's realized volatility and current IV. 10,000 paths are run by default.

Parameters

symbol : str Exchange ticker in uppercase, e.g. "MSFT", "NVDA", "SPY".

Returns

dict with keys: symbol : str — normalized ticker current_price : float — spot price at simulation start mean_price : float — expected price at horizon range_90 : dict — {"lower": float, "upper": float} 90 % CI range_68 : dict — {"lower": float, "upper": float} 68 % CI prob_above_spot: float — probability (0–1) price is above current spot prob_10pct_drop: float — probability (0–1) of ≥10 % decline distribution : dict — histogram data: {"bins": list, "frequencies": list, "kde_x": list, "kde_y": list}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolYesExchange ticker in uppercase, e.g. 'MSFT', 'NVDA', 'SPY'. Do NOT pass company names — use official tickers only.
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the GBM model, default 10,000 paths, and calibration data (realized volatility and IV). While it does not cover limitations or model assumptions, it provides sufficient behavioral context for a simulation tool.

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?

The description is well-structured with bullet points for use cases and a clear 'Returns' section. It is appropriately sized (~200 words) with each sentence adding value. Slightly more conciseness in the parameter description could push it to 5.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description fully explains return values with a detailed dict breakdown, including nested dictionaries for range and distribution. Given the complexity of a Monte Carlo simulation with multiple outputs, the description is very complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explicitly warning against using company names instead of tickers ('Do NOT pass company names — use official tickers only.'), which helps prevent common errors.

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 explicitly states it runs a Monte Carlo price-path simulation for a stock over a 30-day horizon, with a specific verb (run/simulate) and resource (price-path). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'analyze_stock' and 'get_ai_prediction' by focusing on probabilistic range and risk quantification.

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?

The description provides clear when-to-use scenarios: needing a probabilistic range, quantifying downside risk, sizing positions. It implicitly suggests alternatives for single-point estimates but does not explicitly name sibling tools as alternatives, keeping it from a 5.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/haiyunsky/hpsilab-quant-finance-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server