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

Financial Modeling Prep MCP Server

by imbenrabi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

searchCIK

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Central Index Key (CIK) identifiers for publicly traded companies to locate SEC filers and support compliance, regulatory filings, and financial analysis.

Instructions

Easily retrieve the Central Index Key (CIK) for publicly traded companies with the FMP CIK API. Access unique identifiers needed for SEC filings and regulatory documents for a streamlined compliance and financial analysis process.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "cik": "<cik>"
    },
    "name": "searchCIK"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cikYesThe CIK number to search for
limitNoOptional limit on number of results (default: 50)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields 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"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no statement of what is returned, how the 'limit' interacts with matching, or whether the search is exact or partial. The remaining text is promotional rather than behavioral.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

Two short sentences, but both are vendor marketing ('Easily retrieve…', 'with the FMP CIK API', 'streamlined compliance') rather than operational detail. It is not front-loaded with the actionable fact — that the caller supplies a CIK number.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a simple two-parameter read tool this could be adequate, but the description leaves the central ambiguity unresolved: whether the input is a CIK or a company identifier. With no output schema to lean on, an agent has no idea what the response looks like or how many records 'limit' governs.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both 'cik' and 'limit' are already documented, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds no extra meaning and arguably points the wrong way by implying a company-name lookup rather than a CIK value input.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description names a verb ('retrieve') and a resource ('Central Index Key (CIK)'), so the general domain is clear. However, it frames the tool as looking up a CIK *for* a company, while the required parameter is itself a 'cik' — the actual operation is a CIK-based search. It also gives no hint of how this differs from close siblings like searchCompaniesByCIK, getCIKList, or getCompanyProfileByCIK.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. The only usage framing is marketing copy about 'a streamlined compliance and financial analysis process', which does not help an agent choose this tool over the many CIK-related siblings.

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