Financial Modeling Prep MCP Server

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 mentions the API name and general purpose but lacks critical behavioral details: rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, response format, or whether it's a read-only operation. The description is insufficient for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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

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

The description is concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Both sentences add value: the first states what the tool does, and the second explains the benefit. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured.

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

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

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a tool that retrieves financial data (moderate complexity), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on response structure, error cases, rate limits, and authentication—critical for an API-based tool. The description doesn't compensate for the missing structured information.

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

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the single parameter 'symbols' as a comma-separated list of stock symbols. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, maintaining the baseline score.

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

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

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Retrieve market capitalization data for multiple companies in a single request' and mentions the specific API (FMP Batch Market Capitalization API). It distinguishes from siblings like 'getMarketCap' (singular) by emphasizing batch/multiple capabilities, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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

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

The description implies usage context ('compare the market size of various companies simultaneously, streamlining analysis') but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'getMarketCap' or other batch tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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