Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
a-share-mcp

a-share-mcp

by shouldnotappearcalm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_north_money

Retrieve northbound money flow data to track foreign capital entering A-shares via Hong Kong, with date, net purchase, inflow, and balance values in markdown, JSON, or CSV.

Instructions

    Fetches northbound money flow data (北向资金).
    
    Northbound money refers to foreign capital flowing into A-shares via Hong Kong.
    Data source: Eastmoney via Akshare.

    Args:
        format: Output format: 'markdown' | 'json' | 'csv'. Defaults to 'markdown'.

    Returns:
        Northbound money flow data with: 日期, 当日净买额, 当日资金流入, 当日资金余额

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNomarkdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the data source (Eastmoney via Akshare) and implies a read-only fetch, but says nothing about rate limits, network-failure behavior, or freshness/latency of the underlying scrape.

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?

Front-loaded purpose followed by a one-line domain definition, source attribution, Args, and Returns. Every line carries information; nothing is redundant or 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 one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the concept, source, accepted formats, and the returned column names (日期, 当日净买额, etc.). Only freshness/error behavior is left uncovered.

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% and the schema only carries a default, so the description is the sole source of the allowed values 'markdown' | 'json' | 'csv'. That is meaningful compensation for the single parameter, though it does not explain downstream effects of each format.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Fetches northbound money flow data') and even defines the domain concept (foreign capital entering A-shares via Hong Kong). This clearly separates it from siblings like get_stock_money_flow or get_money_supply_data_month, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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 only implied by the definition of northbound money; there is no explicit statement of when to call this instead of the many other money-flow and market-data siblings. An agent must infer that this is the tool for HK-to-A-share flows specifically.

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