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 'real-time' and 'concise overview,' which gives some behavioral context, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or data freshness. For a tool accessing external API data, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 that efficiently convey the tool's function and scope. It is front-loaded with key information ('Access real-time cryptocurrency quotes') and avoids unnecessary details, making it appropriately concise.

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 complexity of accessing real-time financial data, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on response format, error cases, or practical constraints like symbol formatting or API limitations, which are crucial for effective tool 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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'symbol' parameter documented as 'Cryptocurrency symbol (e.g., BTCUSD).' The description does not add any additional meaning or examples beyond this, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating further.

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: 'Access real-time cryptocurrency quotes' and 'Get a concise overview of current crypto prices, changes, and trading volume.' It specifies the verb ('access,' 'get'), resource ('cryptocurrency quotes'), and scope ('real-time,' 'concise overview'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'getCryptocurrencyQuote' or 'getCryptoQuotes,' which appear to serve similar purposes.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'concise overview' but does not clarify if this is for quick checks vs. detailed data, nor does it reference sibling tools like 'getCryptocurrencyQuote' or 'getCryptoQuotes' for comparison. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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