Skip to main content
Glama

Market Data

by com.timzinin.api

13F Portfolio Tracker

thirteen-f-tracker
Read-only

Track institutional managers (hedge funds, family offices) by SEC CIK or name and get their recent 13F-HR quarterly filings — form, filing date, accession number and an EDGAR link. Official SEC data, free, no API key or login. — $0.01/call, x402 (USDC on base).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
managersYesInstitutional managers to watch — each entry is either a 10-digit SEC CIK (e.g. `0001067983` for Berkshire Hathaway, used as-is) or a manager name resolved against EDGAR's filer index (e.g. `Bridgewater Associates`). A name that matches several filers returns the shortlist with similarity scores instead of picking one, so use the CIK or the full filer name for anything generic like `Capital Management`.
sinceDaysNoOnly include 13F filings from the last N days.
maxConcurrencyNoHow many managers to process in parallel. SEC EDGAR's documented rate limit is 10 requests/second — keep this at or below 10.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful context: official SEC data, free, no auth, and a cost of $0.01/call paid in USDC. It also discloses the output fields (form, filing date, accession number, link), which is behaviorally informative beyond the annotation-only 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, information-dense sentence followed by a concise cost/format note. It front-loads the core functionality and avoids redundant elaboration, earning every word.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains the return payload (form, filing date, accession number, EDGAR link), data source, authentication, and cost. It omits some operational details like pagination or rate-limit enforcement, but for a simple read-only tracker this is adequate.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions (e.g., managers can be CIK/name, sinceDays limits, maxConcurrency rate limit). The description itself adds no parameter-specific detail beyond mentioning CIK/name lookup, so it stays at the baseline of 3.

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 ('Track') and resource ('institutional managers' 13F-HR filings'), and clearly identifies the returned data (form, filing date, accession number, EDGAR link). It distinguishes itself from siblings like insider-trading-tracker and sec-edgar-watcher by focusing on 13F quarterly filings.

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 the tool is for tracking institutional managers via CIK/name and getting recent 13F filings, and it adds 'Official SEC data, free, no API key or login'. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over sibling alternatives like sec-edgar-watcher, nor does it mention exclusions.

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

All Market Data toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are distinct by region/source (e.g., otodom-warsaw vs. imovirtual-lisbon), but there are overlapping categories: multiple real estate, job, SEC, and crypto tools. Watchers/alerts (job-alert, re-new-listing-alert, tender-alert) could be confused with their corresponding search tools, and token tools (live-price-oracle, token-launch-radar, rug-pull-scorer) have similar purposes.

Naming Consistency2/5

Names follow no consistent pattern: some are hyphenated source-location (emlakjet-istanbul), some are generic descriptors (job-alert, pricing_info uses underscore), and some are verbose phrases (official-gazette-regulatory-action-router). There is no consistent verb_noun or noun structure, making it hard to predict what a tool does from its name.

Tool Count2/5

With 36 tools, the server is in the 'too many' range (25+). The broad 'Market Data' theme partially justifies the count, but it feels bloated with many single-country listings and overlapping watchers that could be consolidated.

Completeness3/5

The domain is loosely defined as 'market data,' spanning real estate, jobs, tenders, SEC filings, crypto, and clinical trials. While it covers niche areas well, there are notable gaps: no general stock/ETF quotes, no forex/commodities data, and no cross-country aggregate search. The mix of scrapers and alerts leaves the surface feeling uneven.

Resources