Look up financial securities by CUSIP number to retrieve company name, stock symbol, and market capitalization for identification and analysis.
Easily search and retrieve financial securities information by CUSIP number using the FMP CUSIP API. Find key details such as company name, stock symbol, and market capitalization associated with the CUSIP.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cusip | Yes | The CUSIP number to search for |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.9.0Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falseDoes the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it uses the FMP CUSIP API and returns company name, stock symbol, and market capitalization, but it does not discuss error behavior, rate limits, or response shape.
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 and front-loads the main action and resource. The word 'Easily' is mild marketing fluff, but overall there is little wasted text.
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?
For a simple one-parameter read-only lookup with annotations covering safety, the description is largely complete. It identifies the input, the API used, and examples of returned details, though it does not enumerate the full response or error cases.
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 coverage is 100%, and the single parameter is already documented as the CUSIP number to search for. The description reinforces that the lookup is keyed by CUSIP but adds no format, validation, or syntax details beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb and resource: search and retrieve financial securities information by CUSIP number. It also names the key returned details and implicitly distinguishes this from sibling lookup tools such as searchISIN and searchSymbol.
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?
Usage is implied by the requirement to have a CUSIP number, but the description does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over sibling search tools or note any exclusions. It provides clear context without alternative routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.