TipRanks

get_insider_transactions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Individual corporate-insider (officers/directors, Form 4) transactions for a ticker, newest first.

Each row: insider_name, role, is_officer, is_director, action (e.g.
"Auto Sell", "Grant/Award/Other Acquisition"), side (buy/sell), shares,
price (approximate — value / shares; the source has no exact price), value,
date, filing_link (the SEC Form-4 URL), and insider_stars.

This is corporate-insider activity (Form 4). For retail/individual
investor sentiment, use get_assets_data and read investorActivity.

Args:
    ticker: Stock ticker (e.g. 'AAPL').
    limit: Max rows to return (default 30, max 100).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`ticker`	Yes

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: newest-first ordering, approximate price (value/shares, no exact price from source), SEC filing links, and a detailed row layout. It does not contradict annotations.

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 description is detailed but well-structured: purpose sentence, row-field list, usage guidance, and Args. Every part contributes useful information, though the row enumeration is somewhat lengthy. It is not overly verbose given the lack of an output schema.

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?

For a read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what is returned (all fields), ordering, data source, and an alternative for retail sentiment. Minor gaps like unclear 'insider_stars' semantics and no pagination mention prevent a perfect score.

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?

Although the schema has no per-property descriptions (0% coverage), the description's Args section thoroughly explains both parameters: ticker with an example, and limit with default (30) and maximum (100). This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 immediately specifies it returns individual corporate-insider (Form 4) transactions for a ticker, newest first. The phrase 'corporate-insider activity (Form 4)' and the comparison to retail sentiment clearly distinguish it from sibling tools like get_hedge_fund_activity and get_assets_data.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use this tool ('corporate-insider activity') and when to use an alternative: 'For retail/individual investor sentiment, use get_assets_data and read investorActivity.' This is a clear usage directive with a named alternative.

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

All TipRanks tools Inspect

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

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, e.g. get_etf_analysis vs get_etf_forecast both provide ETF analyst consensus, get_etf_holdings vs get_etf_top_stocks both list constituents, and get_portfolio_overview vs get_portfolio_performance both return returns/performance. The detailed descriptions help, but the sheer number of similar tools creates ambiguity in selection.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set is largely consistent with a 'get_' prefix and descriptive nouns (get_stock_quotes, get_crypto_quote, get_dividend_history). Minor deviations include 'list_my_portfolios' instead of 'get_my_portfolios' and singular/plural variants like get_all_commodities_quotes vs get_commodity_quote, but the pattern remains predictable.

Tool Count1/5

With 71 tools, the count far exceeds the 50+ threshold described as an extreme mismatch. Even though the server covers a broad financial domain, such a large surface is overwhelming for an agent and includes many redundant or highly specific tools that could be consolidated.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides comprehensive coverage of TipRanks data: quotes and historical data for all major asset classes, news, earnings and economic calendars, analyst and sentiment data, financial statements, technical analysis, options, portfolios, and screeners. There are no obvious dead ends for typical financial research tasks.

Resources

Need Help?