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 of behavioral disclosure. It mentions accessing 'latest general news articles' but doesn't cover rate limits, authentication needs, pagination behavior (implied by 'page' parameter), or what happens if date ranges are invalid. For a read operation with no annotation coverage, this lacks critical operational context.

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 and front-loaded, stating the core purpose in the first sentence and adding output details in the second. There's no wasted text, but it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating purpose from behavioral notes. Overall, it's efficient with two sentences that earn their place.

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 and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters. It doesn't explain return values (e.g., format of headlines or snippets), error conditions, or usage constraints like rate limits. For a news-fetching tool, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how to interpret results or handle failures.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions in the input schema (e.g., 'Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying date filtering through 'latest' and result scope via 'comprehensive news coverage,' which doesn't compensate for or enhance the schema's documentation. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter details effectively.

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 the latest general news articles' with specific outputs like 'headlines, snippets, and publication URLs.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like getCryptoNews and getForexNews by specifying 'general news articles,' though it doesn't explicitly contrast with getStockNews or getFMPArticles, which might overlap in scope.

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 'comprehensive news coverage' but doesn't specify contexts, exclusions, or compare with sibling tools like getCryptoNews for cryptocurrency-specific news or getStockNews for stock-related news, leaving the agent to infer usage based on tool names alone.

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