Skip to main content
Glama
longbridge

longbridge

Official
by longbridge
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
Rust
Hybrid

Index Constituents / ETF Asset Allocation

constituent
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve index constituents or ETF asset allocation. For indices, get symbols, weights, and market caps; for ETFs, get holdings, regional, asset class, and industry breakdowns.

Instructions

Get the constituents of an index or the asset allocation of an ETF. For an index (e.g. HSI.HK, .DJI.US) returns constituents[]{symbol, name, last_done, change_rate, market_cap, weight}. For an ETF (e.g. QQQ.US, 2800.HK) returns the asset allocation as info[] grouped by asset_type: 1=Holdings (top constituents with code, symbol, holding_detail), 2=Regional (country/region breakdown), 3=AssetClass (stock/bond/cash etc.), 4=Industry (sector breakdown). Each group has report_date and lists[]{name, position_ratio, name_locales}; Holdings groups additionally include code, symbol and holding_detail{industry_name, index_name, holding_type_name}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_jqNoOptional jq filter (jaq syntax) applied to this tool's JSON response before it is returned; it never changes the upstream request. One output is returned as-is, several as a JSON array, none as []. Module imports and the `env`/`debug`/`stderr` builtins are unavailable. Example: .data | map({symbol}). Omit for the full response.
symbolYesIndex symbol, e.g. "HSI.HK"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / _jq / description
      Added value: +"Optional jq filter (jaq syntax) applied to this tool's JSON response before it is returned; it never changes the upstream request. One output is returned as-is, several as a JSON array, none as []. Module imports and the `env`/`debug`/`stderr` builtins are unavailable. Example: .data | map({symbol}). Omit for the full response."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.6
    • addedInput schema / properties / _jq
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.1
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"IndexSymbolParam"
  4. Addedv0.4.5
  5. Removedv0.4.0
  6. Addedv0.3.2
  7. Removedv0.3.1
  8. First observedv0.1.12

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond that: the exact response structure, the four asset_type groups with their numeric codes, which fields each group contains, and the special holding_detail object. This is rich and accurate contextual behavior description.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is dense but well-organized, front-loading the core purpose and then systematically covering the two return shapes. Every sentence adds needed information, and the grouping by asset_type makes the structure easy to parse without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the full burden of telling the agent what to expect. It explains both index and ETF cases, lists the key fields, names the grouping codes, and describes nested objects. For a read-only lookup tool, this is complete enough for an agent to invoke and interpret results correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful parameter guidance beyond the schema: it clarifies that 'symbol' can be an index code like HSI.HK or an ETF code like QQQ.US/2800.HK, and that the output varies based on this value. It also reinforces that _jq never changes the upstream request.

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 states a specific action ('Get the constituents of an index or the asset allocation of an ETF') and names the exact resource types with examples. It clearly distinguishes the two modes (index vs. ETF), making its purpose unmistakable even among many sibling tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context for when to use the tool: whenever index constituents or ETF asset allocation data are needed. It provides concrete symbol examples and explains the difference between index and ETF inputs, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this one.

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