Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ibkr-mcp

ibkr-mcp

by jgalea
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_quote

Retrieve a delayed market data snapshot for a given ticker symbol, supporting stocks, forex, futures, indices, and options.

Instructions

Market data snapshot (delayed by default; see IBKR_MARKET_DATA_TYPE).

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": {
      "symbol": "<symbol>"
    },
    "name": "get_quote"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
symbolYesTicker symbol or numeric conId
currencyNoUSD
exchangeNoSMART
sec_typeNoSTK, CASH (forex pair like EURUSD), FUT, IND, OPTSTK

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions delayed data by default, which is a key behavior, but omits other important aspects like error handling, required permissions, rate limits, or the impact of the IBKR_MARKET_DATA_TYPE setting.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is extremely concise at one sentence, but it sacrifices informativeness. Every word earns its place, yet the sentence is too sparse to fully guide the agent.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, return values need not be described. However, the description fails to specify important usage context, such as typical use cases or boundary conditions (e.g., unsupported sec_types). It is insufficient for a tool with 4 parameters and many siblings.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The description does not elaborate on any parameters. Schema coverage is 50% (only symbol and sec_type have descriptions), so the description should compensate by clarifying currency, exchange, or sec_type usage, but it does not.

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?

The description 'Market data snapshot' clearly indicates the tool retrieves current market data. It is specific enough to distinguish from historical data tools like get_historical_data, but could be more precise about the exact fields returned (e.g., bid, ask, last price).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_historical_data or get_pnl. The note about delay hints at configuration but does not explain decision criteria.

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