Resolve a stock ticker or company name to its SEC identity: CIK number, official name, ticker(s), exchange(s), industry (SIC), and fiscal year end. Start here before other Filings Intel calls.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Ticker (e.g. AAPL), company name, or CIK |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Describes the output comprehensively but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-destructive. However, the description is accurate and covers the tool's behavior well given no annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences: first sentence states purpose and output, second gives usage guidance. Each sentence is essential and there is no redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite no annotations and no output schema, the description provides all necessary information: input, output fields, and usage context relative to sibling tools. Complete for a simple lookup tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the 'query' parameter well. The description adds no further parameter-level detail beyond restating the input types.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states the verb 'resolve' and the resource 'stock ticker or company name to SEC identity', listing specific output fields. Distinguishes from siblings by advising to start here before other calls.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: 'Start here before other Filings Intel calls.' This provides clear context and direction for the workflow.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of SEC filing intelligence: identity lookup, full-text search, financial data, insider filings, and recent filing lists. The only possible overlap is between insider_transactions and recent_filings filtered by form type, but the specialized purpose of insider_transactions is clearly conveyed.
Names are readable but follow mixed conventions: company_lookup and filing_search are noun-noun compounds, recent_filings is adjective-noun, and financials is a bare noun. There is no consistent verb_noun pattern, and the variation makes it harder to predict tool names.
Five tools is well-scoped for an SEC filings intelligence server. Each tool addresses a major need without redundancy, and the count is within the ideal range for an MCP server.
The set covers core workflows: company resolution, search, financials, insider transactions, and recent filing lists. Minor gaps exist, such as direct filing text retrieval or specific filing metadata lookup, but agents can still accomplish most tasks using links and form-type filters.