Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Financial Modeling Prep MCP Server

Financial Modeling Prep MCP Server

by imbenrabi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

getStockPeersBulk

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve peer companies for every stock in the database to compare performance with competitors and similar companies within the same industry or sector.

Instructions

The Stock Peers Bulk API allows you to quickly retrieve a comprehensive list of peer companies for all stocks in the database. By accessing this data, you can easily compare a stock’s performance with its closest competitors or similar companies within the same industry or sector.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "getStockPeersBulk"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.9.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, and idempotent, so the description need not restate safety. It adds useful scope information ('all stocks in the database') but says nothing about response size, pagination, or rate limits—notable for a bulk endpoint that may return a very large payload.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope. The second sentence is somewhat promotional ('easily compare a stock's performance') but still communicates the intended use case without excessive waste.

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 simple zero-parameter bulk read with annotations covering its safety profile, the description adequately conveys what is returned (peer companies for all stocks) and why. It could be stronger by warning about the size of the full-database result or pointing to getStockPeers for single-symbol queries, but nothing essential is missing.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to explain. The baseline of 4 applies because no compensation is needed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieve a list of peer companies, scoped to 'all stocks in the database,' which distinguishes it from the single-symbol getStockPeers sibling. It does not explicitly name or contrast the non-bulk sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied through the benefit statement ('compare a stock's performance with its closest competitors'), but there is no explicit when-to-use versus getStockPeers, no exclusions, and no guidance on the practical tradeoff of pulling the entire database at once.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools