mcp-server-worldquantbrain

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get a data field

get_datafield

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the full description of a single WorldQuant BRAIN data field by its field_id, such as 'close', to identify and understand a field before building alphas.

Instructions

Return one data field with its full description, for example field_id 'close'.

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": {
      "field_id": "<field_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_datafield"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`field_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`type`	No
`delay`	No
`region`	No
`dataset`	No
`category`	No
`coverage`	No
`universe`	No
`dataset_id`	No
`user_count`	No
`alpha_count`	No
`description`	No
`subcategory`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that: no note on behavior for an unknown field_id, no mention of which dataset/scope a field belongs to, no auth or rate-limit context.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource; nothing is wasted. The trailing 'for example field_id "close"' is slightly awkwardly attached but still earns its place as the only concrete parameter hint.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and a one-parameter getter is simple. Still, for a datafield lookup that is likely dataset-scoped, the description never clarifies scope or lookup-by-name expectations, leaving a real gap for the agent.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the single 'field_id' string is undocumented in the schema; the description partly compensates by giving the concrete example 'close', which conveys that IDs are short field names. It still doesn't say how to discover valid IDs or whether field_id is dataset-scoped.

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: 'Return one data field with its full description.' The word 'one' signals single-record retrieval versus the sibling list_datafields, though that sibling is never named. An agent can grasp the intent without opening the schema.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no mention of the obvious alternative list_datafields for bulk enumeration. Usage is only implied by the singular 'one data field' phrasing.

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