Skip to main content
Glama

search_8k_filings

Search recent SEC 8-K filings (current report) from the past 72 hours.

Args:
    items: Comma-separated 8-K item codes to filter on. Examples: '1.05'
        (cybersecurity), '5.02' (officer departure), '8.01' (other events),
        '1.01' (material agreement). Leave None for all 8-Ks.
    suspected_buried_only: If True, return only filings where our
        body-text classifier flagged a suspected misclassification —
        i.e. cyber language under Item 8.01 that should have been 1.05,
        officer-departure language under 8.01 that should have been 5.02.
    limit: Max results (1-50, default 25).

Returns:
    JSON-formatted list of filings. Each includes: accession_number,
    company_name, filed_at, filer_reported_items, detected_items,
    discrepancy_items (in body but not reported), and
    suspected_buried_events (map of reported→suspected).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsNo
limitNo
suspected_buried_onlyNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully describes read-only behavior (search), time window, filtering, and the suspected buried classifier. It does not mention rate limits or authentication, but these are typical for search tools.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is efficiently structured: a one-sentence purpose, followed by Args in a clear list format, then Returns. Every sentence adds value, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the time window, parameters, and return fields. An output schema exists and is supplemented by text. It does not address pagination or zero-result cases, but overall it provides sufficient context for a search tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully defines each parameter: items with examples (e.g., '1.05' for cybersecurity), suspected_buried_only with clear explanation, and limit with range and default.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it searches recent SEC 8-K filings from the past 72 hours, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_13d_filings and search_atm_offerings by focusing on the 8-K form.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for 8-K filings, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_filing for a single filing or search_13d_filings for 13D forms. No when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: get_filing retrieves a specific filing by accession number, while the three search tools focus on different filing types (13D/13G, 8-K, ATM offerings). No overlap or ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_filing and search_<type>_filings. The slight difference between 'get' and 'search' is appropriate for the distinct operations (retrieval vs. search).

Tool Count5/5

With 4 tools, the server is well-scoped. It covers both retrieval of a specific filing and search across three important SEC filing categories. The count feels neither too thin nor too heavy for the domain.

Completeness3/5

The tools cover a niche but useful subset of SEC filings. However, there is no general search (e.g., by company name or date range) and no support for other common filings like 10-K or 10-Q. The 72-hour recency limit also restricts coverage. Gaps exist for broader SEC research.