Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
yfinance-ai MCP server

yfinance-ai MCP server

by lkcair
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_peer_comparison

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare a stock against sector peers or custom tickers on key financial metrics, returning a side-by-side table for quick analysis.

Instructions

Compare a stock with its peers on key metrics.

Args: ticker: Primary stock ticker symbol peers: Optional comma-separated peer tickers (if not provided, uses sector peers)

Returns: Comparison table of key metrics across stocks

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": {
      "ticker": "<ticker>"
    },
    "name": "get_peer_comparison"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
peersNo
tickerYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds one useful behavior beyond that: the default fallback to sector peers when the peers argument is omitted. It says nothing about data freshness, limits on peer count, or latency, so it is a modest addition.

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?

Short and front-loaded, with the core purpose stated before the Args/Returns blocks. The Args block is slightly redundant as a format but the content is efficient. Nothing is padded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a two-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers both parameters, the default behavior, and the return shape. The remaining gap is disambiguation from the sibling compare_stocks, which an agent needs but cannot get here.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and largely meets it: ticker is defined as the primary stock ticker symbol, and peers is documented as an optional comma-separated list with its default fallback behavior. The only omission is format constraints such as a maximum number of peers.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Compare a stock with its peers on key metrics.' An agent knows the operation and its scope. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling 'compare_stocks' or 'get_historical_comparison', leaving genuine ambiguity about which comparison tool to pick.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternative tools are named. The note that peers falls back to 'sector peers' when omitted is a behavior detail, not selection guidance. With near-identically named siblings like compare_stocks, the absence of routing guidance is a real gap.

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