Skip to main content
Glama
imbenrabi

Financial Modeling Prep MCP Server

getETFList

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a list of Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) with their ticker symbols and company names. This tool simplifies identifying specific ETFs for financial analysis.

Instructions

Quickly find ticker symbols and company names for Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) using the FMP ETF Symbol Search API. This tool simplifies identifying specific ETFs by their name or ticker.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The MCP tool handler for 'getETFList'. Registers the tool with no input schema, calls directoryClient.getETFList(), and returns the result as JSON text.
    server.tool(
      "getETFList",
      "Quickly find ticker symbols and company names for Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) using the FMP ETF Symbol Search API. This tool simplifies identifying specific ETFs by their name or ticker.",
      {}, 
      async () => {
        try {
          const results = await directoryClient.getETFList();
          return {
            content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(results, null, 2) }],
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `Error: ${
                  error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)
                }`,
              },
            ],
            isError: true,
          };
        }
      }
    );
  • Type definition for ETF entries returned by getETFList. Contains symbol and name fields.
    export interface ETFEntry {
      symbol: string;
      name: string;
    }
  • The DirectoryClient method that makes the actual HTTP GET request to the '/etf-list' endpoint to retrieve the list of ETFs.
    async getETFList(options?: {
      signal?: AbortSignal;
      context?: FMPContext;
    }): Promise<ETFEntry[]> {
      return super.get<ETFEntry[]>("/etf-list", {}, options);
    }
  • Registration of the 'getETFList' tool with the MCP server via server.tool(). Registered inside the registerDirectoryTools function.
    server.tool(
      "getETFList",
      "Quickly find ticker symbols and company names for Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) using the FMP ETF Symbol Search API. This tool simplifies identifying specific ETFs by their name or ticker.",
      {}, 
      async () => {
        try {
          const results = await directoryClient.getETFList();
          return {
            content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(results, null, 2) }],
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `Error: ${
                  error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)
                }`,
              },
            ],
            isError: true,
          };
        }
      }
    );
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to restate them. It adds that the tool uses the FMP ETF Symbol Search API, but provides no further behavioral details like rate limits or output structure.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose. No extraneous words or redundant information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a parameterless tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic function. It could mention the output format or pagination, but the core purpose is clear.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable given the absence of parameters. Baseline 4 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool finds ticker symbols and company names for ETFs, which is specific and distinct from generic search tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like getETFQuotes or searchSymbol.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It merely states the functionality without context for selection.

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/imbenrabi/Financial-Modeling-Prep-MCP-Server'

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