Finbolt

changes_since

For up to 40 companies, what each one filed with the SEC since a date in the last 400 days: annual and quarterly reports, amendments, earnings-release 8-Ks, non-reliance 8-Ks (the company says earlier statements should no longer be relied on), the new periods get_fact can now answer, and figures a filing in that window changed. 1 credit per company with a new filing in the period; a call where nothing changed is free.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "companies": "<companies>",
      "since": "<since>"
    },
    "name": "changes_since"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`as_of`	No	Optional date: what was on file then
`since`	Yes	Date, inclusive, compared with the filing date, within the last 400 days, e.g. '2026-10-01'
`companies`	Yes	Tickers (e.g. 'AAPL') or SEC CIKs, at most 40

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does so well: it discloses the 400-day window, the 40-company cap, and a credit-based pricing model, including that a no-change call is free. It also explains the meaning of a non-reliance 8-K. It does not discuss authentication or the shape of the response beyond what the output schema covers.

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?

The output is two sentences. The first is dense but front-loaded with the scope, and the second carries the pricing rule. The parenthetical explanations of non-reliance 8-Ks and get_fact periods take up space but earn their place.

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?

This is a read-oriented batch query tool with an output schema, so return values do not need to be explained. Coverage of limits, cost, and filing categories is strong. The main omission is the point-in-time as_of parameter, which goes unmentioned in the prose.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents tickers/CIKs, the inclusive since date, and the 400-day limit; the description largely repeats these limits. Notably, it never explains the optional as_of parameter (point-in-time view), so it does not add meaning beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource: what each of up to 40 companies filed with the SEC since a given date, and it enumerates the filing categories (annual/quarterly reports, amendments, earnings-release and non-reliance 8-Ks, newly answerable get_fact periods, changed figures). This is detailed enough to distinguish it from siblings such as restatement_history and get_fact.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It clearly implies when to call this tool: to check what has changed since a date. It also links to get_fact by saying the new periods get_fact can now answer are included, which gives useful context. However, it does not explicitly compare itself with siblings such as restatement_history or financials, nor does it state exclusions.

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

All Finbolt tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?