Financial Stock Market MCP Server (NatalieCheong/MCP_for_Simple_Financial_Stock_Market) is an MCP server listed on the M8ven Trust Index. It scores 39 out of 100, grade F. It declares 4 tools. No publisher has claimed this listing.

F
Warning
39/100

Financial Stock Market MCP Server

Provides tools for stock data retrieval, historical analysis, and market comparison using yfinance. It features robust guardrails to ensure secure interactions and blocks restricted content like investment advice.

Warning. Serious findings were identified. Review the full report before connecting. Grades reflect the full trust pyramid: code, verification depth, and reputation. New projects cap at C until adoption is earned.

How we verified

⚡ Live Monitored: not connected

Verified is a snapshot. Live keeps it current, and builds your track record.

⚡ Connect GitHub → continuous verification on every pushwhy connect →

Who stands behind it

NatalieCheong

Source: Glama

Is this your MCP?

Claim it to get a verified publisher badge, a free copy of our full audit findings, and direct contact for any high-priority issues we find. Or connect your repo for our deepest verification, Live Monitored: read-only, revoke anytime. What we access →

Install from

The grade above is for the source repository. Registries can serve a different version, so we mark the ones we were not able to read.

// key findings
⚠️
Tool descriptions don’t match what handlers do
4 tools describe read intent but their handlers mutate — get_stock_info (line 55: with open(filename, 'w') as f:); get_historical_data (line 107: with open(filename, 'w') as f:); compare_stocks (line 173: with open(filename, 'w') as f:)
No credential exfiltration, no sensitive file access, no obfuscation
Static analysis found nothing flowing your secrets to unexpected places.
// quality suggestions

Tool annotations

No tools have read-only/destructive annotations

Add readOnlyHint or destructiveHint annotations to every tool so hosts can warn users before invoking.

All four hints declared on every tool

4/4 tools missing one or more hints — get_stock_info (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint); get_historical_data (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint); compare_stocks (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), +1 more. OpenAI's directory rejects tools where any of the four hints are missing or non-boolean.

For every tool, set all four hints (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint) to explicit true/false values that match the handler’s actual behaviour.

Descriptions match behaviour

4 tools describe read intent but their handlers mutate — get_stock_info (line 55: with open(filename, 'w') as f:); get_historical_data (line 107: with open(filename, 'w') as f:); compare_stocks (line 173: with open(filename, 'w') as f:)

Rename the tool, rewrite the description, or move the side-effect into a separate clearly-named tool.

Tool inputs are validated

3/4 tool handlers declare input schemas (75%)

Declare an inputSchema with zod/joi/yup on every tool definition.

License file

No license file

Add a LICENSE file (MIT, Apache-2.0, etc.).

Tests exist

No test files found

Add tests that exercise each declared tool.

Tool description accuracy

4 tools have description/behavior mismatches: get_stock_info: description implies read-only but handler writes/deletes/executes; get_historical_data: description implies read-only but handler writes/deletes/executes; compare_stocks: description implies read-only but handler writes/deletes/executes

Update tool descriptions to accurately reflect all capabilities — especially write, delete, or execute operations.

Claim the listing to review these findings one by one and send us a correction where you disagree, straight to the team. Claiming also means we tell you when the grade moves, and reach you first if we find anything urgent.

// full audit trail
The findings above are the summary. The full trail, every check we ran, each deduction, the network hosts observed and the dependency advisories, goes to verified publishers, along with an alert whenever a new one lands. Verified publishers can also review each finding and dispute it in one click. Publisher corrections have sharpened several of our checks this month, because the maintainer knows the codebase better than any scanner.
// improvement guidance — verified publishers only
We have 7 concrete improvements we can share with the publisher of this MCP. Each comes with specific guidance to raise the trust score.
// embed badge in your README
[![M8ven Verified](https://m8ven.ai/badge/mcp/nataliecheong/mcp_for_simple_financial_stock_market?variant=verified)](https://m8ven.ai/mcp/nataliecheong/mcp_for_simple_financial_stock_market)
Shows verification status without the grade. Want the grade badge instead? Remove ?variant=verified from the URL.
commit: 390698999d95be216ef8e7420efc383000627c6a
code hash: 6887e05ffb081adec07ceed8dd2a954aa6407c4bef7dbc2216e2728684fb2da8
view raw JSON →
Check MCPs from inside your assistant
Tool Check · MCP

Vetting this one by hand? Tool Check is an MCP that scores other MCPs. Add it once and ask Claude, ChatGPT, or any MCP client to grade a server, surface CVEs, check the publisher, and suggest safer alternatives — before you install.

https://m8ven.ai/api/mcp/tool-check
check_toolsearch_toolscompare_toolsrecommend_alternativescheck_publisherreport_concern
How to add it →Free · no account needed · works in any MCP client