No user-submitted related servers found.
Scored across 11 tools
Most tools are cleanly separated by resource and granularity (fp_search_funds vs fp_fund, fp_stocks vs fp_stock, fp_indices vs fp_index_history), and descriptions explicitly cross-reference each other's chaining roles. The only real friction is fp_indices vs fp_industries, which both rank stock-market industries but by different metrics (return vs traded value) — descriptions disambiguate, but the names alone do not.
A consistent fp_ prefix with snake_case throughout, and singular/plural pairs are used meaningfully (fp_fund/fp_stocks, fp_index_history). Minor deviation: most names are plain resource nouns while a few use a verb modifier (fp_search_funds, fp_compare), so the pattern is not perfectly uniform but remains highly predictable.
11 tools is well within the ideal range and each one maps to a distinct query shape: fund discovery, fund detail, time series, comparison, manager ranking, index market overview, index history, stock screening, stock quote, industry ranking. No redundant or filler tools.
The read-only market-data domain is covered end to end: funds (types, search, detail, history, compare, managers), indices (summary and history), stocks (screen and quote with optional OHLC history) and industries. Gaps are minor — no direct fund-side dividend or NAV-metric query beyond fp_history, no cross-asset comparison, and industry-to-index linkage only works implicitly via fp_indices(query=...).