Skip to main content
Glama
jflamb

FDIC BankFind MCP Server

by jflamb
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

Analyze Bank Health (CAMELS-Style)

fdic_analyze_bank_health
Read-onlyIdempotent

Produce a CAMELS-style health assessment for any FDIC-insured bank using public financial data. Get component scores, composite rating, trend analysis, and risk signals in structured JSON.

Instructions

Produce a CAMELS-style analytical assessment for a single FDIC-insured institution using the public off-site proxy model.

Scores five components — Capital (C), Asset Quality (A), Earnings (E), Liquidity (L), Sensitivity (S) — using published FDIC financial data and derives a weighted composite rating (1=Strong to 5=Unsatisfactory), plus a proxy model overall band (1.0–4.0 scale).

Output includes:

  • Composite and component ratings with individual metric scores

  • Proxy model overall assessment band with capital classification

  • Management overlay assessment (inferred from public data patterns)

  • Trend analysis across prior quarters for key metrics

  • Risk signals flagging critical and warning-level concerns

  • Structured JSON for programmatic consumption (legacy + proxy fields)

NOTE: Management (M) is omitted from component scoring — cannot be assessed from public data. Sensitivity (S) uses proxy metrics (NIM trend, securities concentration). This is a public off-site analytical proxy, not an official CAMELS rating.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
certYesFDIC Certificate Number of the institution to analyze.
repdteNoReport Date (YYYYMMDD). Defaults to the most recent quarter likely to have published data.
quartersNoNumber of prior quarters to fetch for trend analysis (default 8).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Tool Definition Quality

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by detailing the exact output components, the proxy nature, limitations (M omitted, S proxies), and that it uses published FDIC data. It fully discloses behavioral traits beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured with bullet points and clear sections. It is somewhat lengthy but each part adds valuable information. It is appropriately detailed without being excessively verbose.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool has an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers all necessary aspects: input parameters, output structure, limitations, and analytical scope. It is complete for its complexity level.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for its 3 parameters. The overall tool description does not add new meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states it produces a CAMELS-style analytical assessment for a single FDIC-insured institution using a public off-site proxy model. It lists components and output, distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on specific aspects like credit concentration or funding profile.

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?

The description explains what the tool does and notes that Management component is omitted and that it's a proxy model. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fdic_compare_peer_health or fdic_detect_risk_signals.

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/jflamb/fdic-mcp-server'

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