Finviz + SEC EDGAR MCP Server

screen_value_stocks

Screen value stocks using defaults for market cap, P/E, ROE, and debt/equity. Generate investment ideas quickly, with optional custom filters for finer control.

Instructions

Quick value stock screener with sensible defaults. Convenience wrapper around screen_stocks — use that tool for full control over filters. Useful for fast idea generation.

Args: min_market_cap: Minimum market cap — "small", "mid", "large", "mega". Maps to: small=cap_smallover, mid=cap_midover, large=cap_largeover, mega=cap_mega max_pe: Max P/E — e.g. "u20" for under 20, "u15" for under 15. min_roe: Min ROE — e.g. "o10" for over 10%, "o15" for over 15%. max_debt_equity: Max debt/equity — e.g. "u1" for under 1, "u0.5". additional_filters: Extra raw filter codes (comma-separated). e.g. "fa_div_o2,sec_consumerdefensive"

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`max_pe`	No	u25
`min_roe`	No	o10
`min_market_cap`	No	mid
`max_debt_equity`	No	u1
`additional_filters`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0Sep 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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 implies a read-only operation via 'screener' but does not explicitly state it is non-mutating or disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits or auth needs. The mention of 'sensible defaults' adds some behavioral context, but the description could be more explicit about safety.

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?

The description is succinct and well-organized: a one-line summary, usage guidance, then an annotated Args list. Every sentence adds value, and the structure makes it easy to scan.

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?

Despite having no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description covers purpose, usage, all parameters, and examples. With an output schema present, return values are covered elsewhere. The description is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description compensates fully. Each parameter is explained with examples, and the min_market_cap mapping to raw filter codes is especially valuable. This goes far beyond the schema's bare titles.

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?

Description clearly states the tool is a 'Quick value stock screener with sensible defaults', specifying the verb and resource. It explicitly contrasts with the sibling screen_stocks, saying it is a 'Convenience wrapper' for 'full control', making the distinction unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit guidance: 'Convenience wrapper around screen_stocks — use that tool for full control over filters. Useful for fast idea generation.' This tells the agent when to use this tool (quick screens, idea generation) and when to use the alternative (full control), leaving no ambiguity.

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