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 states the tool tracks stocks with 'largest price increases' and 'significant price surges', but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as data freshness (e.g., real-time vs. daily), rate limits, authentication needs, or output format. This leaves gaps in understanding how the tool behaves operationally.

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 two sentences and front-loaded with the core purpose, but the second sentence ('Identify the companies... opportunities') is somewhat redundant and adds marketing fluff rather than operational clarity. It could be more concise by merging or omitting the second part without losing essential information.

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 the tool's complexity (market data retrieval) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what data is returned (e.g., list of stocks, metrics like percentage gain), time frames, or limitations. For a tool with no structured output information, more detail is needed to guide effective use.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and it appropriately doesn't mention any. A baseline of 4 is applied since no parameters exist, and the description doesn't introduce confusion about inputs.

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: 'Track the stocks with the largest price increases' using a specific API ('Top Stock Gainers API'), which is a specific verb ('track') and resource ('stocks with largest price increases'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'getBiggestLosers' by focusing on gains, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other market data tools like 'getMostActiveStocks'.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'offering potential growth opportunities', which implies a use case for investment analysis, but doesn't specify contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions compared to siblings like 'getMostActiveStocks' or 'getStockPriceChange'.

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