Skip to main content
Glama

Signal Nodus SEC Filings

by ai.signalnodus

US federal contract awards

government_contracts
Read-only

Experimental (outside the core SEC path; not covered by the published accuracy eval, may change or be withdrawn): Federal prime contract awards to a company from USAspending.gov, largest first: award id, amount, agency, and period. Recipient match is by name text. Costs $0.05 per call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLookback window in days, 30-1825. Default 365.
limitNoAwards to return, max 25. Default 10.
companyYesRecipient name, e.g. Lockheed Martin.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds useful behavioral context: experimental/unstable, cost per call, recipient name-text matching, and output ordering (largest first). No contradiction.

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?

Concise but packs key info: experimental status, cost, output fields, matching method. Front-loaded with the most important caveat. Not overly verbose.

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?

Completeness is good for a simple tool with 3 params and no output schema. Includes cost, experimental nature, and return fields. Missing pagination or no-result behavior, but not critical given tool simplicity.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. Description adds no parameter-specific details beyond schema, though it clarifies matching is by name text for the company param, a small addition.

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?

Clearly states it returns federal prime contract awards to a company from USAspending.gov, with fields listed. Differentiates by scope and source, but does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, so not a 5.

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?

Mentions experimental status and cost but gives no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use or comparison with sibling tools like lobbying or company_financials.

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

All Signal Nodus SEC Filings toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have clearly written descriptions, but several pairs overlap semantically: token_price/token_report, latest_filings/recent_filings, and institutional_holdings/who_holds/activist_stakes all require careful reading to pick the right one. The overlap is not severe enough for a 2, but it is still more than the occasional confusion.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are consistently snake_case and mostly descriptive, but the set does not follow one naming convention. It mixes noun phrases (crop_data, token_report, insider_trades) with verb phrases (lookup_company, compare_filings, verify_financial_claim), and pairs like latest_filings/recent_filings create avoidable confusion.

Tool Count2/5

31 tools is too many for what is nominally an SEC Filings server, and the scope sprawls into unrelated domains such as EVM gas, tokens, prediction markets, crop data, and x402 auditing. The count does not feel earned by a coherent workflow; it feels like an uncurated bundle of endpoints.

Completeness3/5

The SEC filing workflow is reasonably covered: company lookup, search, latest/recent filings, section extraction, 8-K events, comparisons, ownership filings, and XBRL financial checks are all present. However, there is no full-filing retrieval endpoint, no deep company financial history beyond a single concept, and many non-SEC subdomains are only one-off data points, so the overall surface is still incomplete.

Resources