[Regulatory Filings] Retrieve SEC Form 13F-HR holdings — institutional investor positions ($100M+ AUM funds). Pull Berkshire Hathaway, Renaissance, Citadel, Two Sigma quarterly position disclosures.
Args: filer_cik: Filer CIK number (e.g. "0001067983" for Berkshire) or fund name (passed as query) quarter: Quarter in YYYY-QN format (e.g. "2025-Q4")
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| quarter | No | ||
| filer_cik | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms a read operation with 'Retrieve.' It adds context about the AUM threshold ($100M+). No discussion of rate limits, authentication, or data freshness, but annotations cover the essential safety profile.
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 concise with a clear noun-verb start and a structured Args block. No redundant sentences, but could be slightly more streamlined by omitting examples that are already implied.
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?
The tool is simple with 2 parameters and no output schema. The description covers what and how, but lacks details on return format, pagination, or error handling. Given annotations, it meets basic needs but leaves agent guessing on output structure.
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?
The input schema has 0% documentation coverage, but the description provides detailed meaning for both parameters: filer_cik (CIK number or fund name) and quarter (YYYY-QN format with examples). This compensates for the schema gap effectively.
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 clearly states the tool retrieves SEC Form 13F-HR holdings, a specific resource, with examples of institutional investors like Berkshire Hathaway. It differentiates from sibling tools (e.g., get_13f_delta) by focusing on holdings.
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 fetching institutional holdings but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_13f_delta or get_form_4_insider_trades. No when-not-to-use or alternative references.
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.
Many tools have overlapping functionality across categories (e.g., multiple search_arxiv, search_google_scholar, real estate tools, DNS/WHOIS checks). An agent would struggle to differentiate between similar tools from different categories, leading to ambiguity.
Tools follow a 'category__verb_noun' pattern mostly, but verbs vary (get, search, screen, check, etc.) and some categories use different orders (e.g., 'get_repo_stats' vs 'search_repos'). The consistency is acceptable but not uniform across the entire set.
With 152 tools, the server is excessively large for a single MCP server. While it aims to be an all-in-one gateway, the sheer number overwhelms the agent and likely exceeds practical limits for coherent selection.
The server covers a wide range of domains (finance, real estate, news, developer tools, etc.) but has notable gaps (e.g., social media APIs, CRM tools). Coverage is broad but not exhaustive, and some niche areas (e.g., global stock exchanges) are over-represented.