List a company's most recent SEC filings (10-K annual reports, 10-Q quarterly, 8-K material events, S-1 IPO registrations, etc.) with filing dates and direct document links. Optionally filter by form type.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of results to return. | |
| query | Yes | Ticker, name, or CIK | |
| form_type | No | Optional filter, e.g. 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, 4 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the key output fields (filing dates and direct document links) and optional form-type filtering, but it does not mention ordering guarantees, pagination/limit behavior, or what happens when no filings are found. This is adequate for a simple read-only list tool but not comprehensive.
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds output specifics and the optional filter. There is no redundancy or filler.
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?
Given the low complexity, full schema coverage, and read-only nature, the description is mostly complete: it states what the tool lists, what fields are returned, and the optional filter. It stops short of fully complete because it does not address ordering details or the relationship to filing_search, but these are minor for a simple listing 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 description coverage is 100%, so query, limit, and form_type are already documented. The description adds examples of form types (10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, S-1) but does not add meaningfully beyond the schema for the parameters themselves.
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?
The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'List a company's most recent SEC filings' with concrete output details (filing dates, direct document links). It is clear and unambiguous, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling filing_search tool.
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?
The description implies usage for retrieving recent company filings and mentions optional form-type filtering, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over filing_search or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions are stated.
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 maps to a clearly distinct SEC data need: company identity resolution, full-text filing search, XBRL financials, insider transaction filings, and recent filing lists. Even the two filing-related tools are sharply separated by global keyword search versus company-specific recent activity.
All names use lowercase snake_case, but the pattern is mixed: company_lookup and filing_search use object+action, while financials, insider_transactions, and recent_filings are noun phrases. The names are readable and descriptive, but there is no consistent verb_noun structure across the set.
Five tools is well-scoped for an SEC filings intelligence server, covering lookup, search, financials, insider activity, and recent filings without redundant surface. Each tool has a clear role and the count sits comfortably in the ideal range.
The main research workflow is covered: identify a company, search filings, pull financial facts, inspect insider filings, and list recent SEC submissions. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct tool for fetching a single filing's full text or parsed insider transaction details, but returned links and financial data cover most needs.