market-research-mcp

get_fundamentals

Retrieve company fundamentals from SEC XBRL 10-K/10-Q filings—newest period first—including revenue, income, EPS, cash flow, debt, and cash by annual or quarterly periods.

Instructions

Company fundamentals from SEC XBRL filings (10-K/10-Q), newest period first.

metrics: any of revenue, gross_profit, operating_income, net_income, diluted_eps,
basic_eps, operating_cash_flow, capex, total_debt, cash, shares_diluted,
shares_outstanding (default: all). periods: "annual" or "quarterly". n: number of
periods (1-40). Each value carries the XBRL tag used, the period dates, the filing's
form, accession, filed date and URL. Missing values are null with a reason.
Source: SEC EDGAR XBRL companyfacts.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`n`	No
`ticker`	Yes
`metrics`	No
`periods`	No	annual

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cik`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`as_of`	Yes
`notes`	No
`stale`	No
`source`	Yes
`ticker`	Yes
`values`	Yes
`metrics`	Yes
`periods`	Yes
`source_url`	Yes
`retrieved_at`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and does so fairly well: it discloses the data source, newest-first ordering, and that missing values are null with a reason. It also describes per-value metadata such as XBRL tag, period dates, form, accession, filed date, and URL, though it does not mention rate limits or permission requirements.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then structured into metrics, periods, n, return metadata, missing-value behavior, and source. Every sentence adds useful information with no filler.

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 absence of annotations, an output schema, and four parameters, the description supplies enough context to call the tool correctly: it covers the data source, allowed metrics, period options, range for n, ordering, missing-value behavior, and per-value provenance. Return shape is handled by the output schema, so no further return-format explanation is needed.

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 must compensate, and it largely does: it enumerates all valid metrics with the default of all, defines periods as annual or quarterly, and constrains n to 1-40. It omits the n default of 5 and does not explicitly define ticker, but those are minor gaps.

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 states a specific resource and source: company fundamentals from SEC XBRL filings (10-K/10-Q), newest period first. It is clearly distinct in subject matter from siblings like get_price_history or get_insider_transactions, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool's domain and the detailed parameter values, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to siblings such as list_filings or get_filing_section. An agent can infer the tool is for financial fundamentals, but must decide on its own when this is preferable to filing-level tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server