Skip to main content
Glama
jwaresolutions

Polygon MCP Server

list_tickers

Search and list available financial tickers by market, security type, or search query to identify trading instruments for market analysis.

Instructions

Search/list available tickers

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
searchNoSearch query
typeNoSecurity type
marketNoMarket type
limitNoNumber of results (default: 100)

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'list_tickers' tool. It constructs query parameters from input args and fetches the list of tickers from the Polygon API endpoint '/v3/reference/tickers', returning the JSON response or an error message.
    list_tickers: async (args: { search?: string; type?: string; market?: string; limit?: number }) => {
      try {
        const params: any = {
          limit: args.limit || 100,
          active: true
        };
        if (args.search) params.search = args.search;
        if (args.type) params.type = args.type;
        if (args.market) params.market = args.market;
    
        const response = await polygonApi.get('/v3/reference/tickers', { params });
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2)
          }]
        };
      } catch (error: any) {
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: `Error listing tickers: ${error.response?.data?.message || error.message}`
          }],
          isError: true
        };
      }
    },
  • Input schema definition for the 'list_tickers' tool, specifying optional parameters for search query, security type, market, and limit with enums for type and market.
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        search: {
          type: "string",
          description: "Search query"
        },
        type: {
          type: "string",
          enum: ["CS", "ADRC", "ADRP", "ADRR", "UNIT", "RIGHT", "PFD", "FUND", "SP", "WARRANT", "INDEX", "ETF", "ETN", "OS", "GDR", "OTHER", "NYRS", "AGEN", "EQLK", "BOND", "ADRW", "BASKET"],
          description: "Security type"
        },
        market: {
          type: "string",
          enum: ["stocks", "crypto", "fx", "otc", "indices"],
          description: "Market type"
        },
        limit: {
          type: "number",
          description: "Number of results (default: 100)"
        }
      }
    }
  • src/index.ts:356-382 (registration)
    Registration of the 'list_tickers' tool in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler response, including name, description, and full input schema.
    {
      name: "list_tickers",
      description: "Search/list available tickers",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          search: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Search query"
          },
          type: {
            type: "string",
            enum: ["CS", "ADRC", "ADRP", "ADRR", "UNIT", "RIGHT", "PFD", "FUND", "SP", "WARRANT", "INDEX", "ETF", "ETN", "OS", "GDR", "OTHER", "NYRS", "AGEN", "EQLK", "BOND", "ADRW", "BASKET"],
            description: "Security type"
          },
          market: {
            type: "string",
            enum: ["stocks", "crypto", "fx", "otc", "indices"],
            description: "Market type"
          },
          limit: {
            type: "number",
            description: "Number of results (default: 100)"
          }
        }
      }
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Search/list' implies a read operation, but the description doesn't specify whether this is a filtered search, what the return format looks like, pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 extremely concise at just three words, making it front-loaded and efficient. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness - it's arguably under-specified rather than optimally concise. The single phrase communicates the core function without wasted words, but could benefit from additional context.

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 search tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'available tickers' means, how results are returned, what format they're in, or how this tool relates to the seven sibling tools. The agent lacks sufficient context to understand the tool's full behavior and appropriate usage scenarios.

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 all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema. It doesn't explain how the search parameter works, what the type/market enums represent, or how the limit parameter affects results. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate schema coverage without description enhancement.

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 'Search/list available tickers' states the basic purpose (searching/listing tickers) but is vague about scope and differentiation. It doesn't specify what constitutes 'available' tickers or how this differs from sibling tools like get_ticker_details or get_snapshot. The description provides a minimal viable purpose statement without clear distinction from alternatives.

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 the seven sibling tools. There's no mention of alternatives like get_ticker_details for specific ticker information or get_aggregates for aggregated data. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone, which is insufficient for informed tool selection.

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/jwaresolutions/polygon-mcp-server'

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