Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

TradeStar Insider

by com.tradestarinsider
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Insider buys by ticker, today, or a date range (SEC Form 4)

insider_buys
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when the user asks which insiders bought a stock, whether a ticker has insider buying, or for Form 4 buys in a date range. Pass ticker, start+end for an inclusive ISO range, or neither for today's buys (SEC code P); days narrows, include_unlisted adds non-listed issuers. Each row carries filing_url, offering_context, transaction_date, acceptance_datetime, aff10b5One (10b5-1 flag), is_amendment/original_accession (4/A linkage), and partial_fields (reason for any null). Caveat: only purchases that pass the signal filter are returned; code P is not proof of a buy.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNoInclusive range end, ISO YYYY-MM-DD. Give with `start` for a date range.
daysNoOnly rows filed within the last N days (relative to today).
as_ofNoPublish-boundary replay: UTC ISO-8601 instant (or a bare YYYY-MM-DD, read as end-of-day UTC). Returns only rows that had crossed the publish boundary at or before it — the exact feed visible at that past moment. Each row carries `first_served_at` (null on rows published before the stamp existed; those are kept, as they were already public).
limitNoMax rows to return (default 25, newest first). Page with offset; the response's total_matched shows the full count. limit<=0 = no cap.
startNoInclusive range start, ISO YYYY-MM-DD. Give with `end` for a date range.
offsetNoRows to skip before this page (pagination). Default 0.
tickerNoCase-insensitive exact ticker filter, e.g. DKS.
include_unlistedNoInclude unlisted issuers (blank/NONE/N/A tickers and 5-letter mutual-fund classes). Default false = exchange-listed common stock only. Every row carries a `listed_equity` boolean.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / as_of
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Publish-boundary replay: UTC ISO-8601 instant (or a bare YYYY-MM-DD, read as end-of-day UTC). Returns only rows that had crossed the publish boundary at or before it — the exact feed visible at that past moment. Each row carries `first_served_at` (null on rows published before the stamp existed; those are kept, as they were already public).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), yet the description adds substantive context: the signal filter restricts results, code P is not proof of a buy, and rows carry `partial_fields` explaining nulls. It does not cover rate limits or response envelope details, but the added caveats are real behavioral disclosure.

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?

Front-loaded with the usage trigger, then parameter routing, then the row shape, then the caveat — each sentence carries distinct information with no restatement of the schema or name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so enumerating row fields (filing_url, offering_context, transaction_date, aff10b5One, is_amendment/original_accession, partial_fields) is necessary and done. All 8 parameters are documented in the schema, and the one semantic trap (code P vs. a genuine buy) is called out.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine value the schema does not: how the filters combine ('ticker, start+end for an inclusive ISO range, or neither for today's buys') and what the default path yields (SEC code P for today). It also explains the role of `days` and `include_unlisted` in prose.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (insider buys / SEC Form 4) and immediately scopes it by ticker, today, or date range, which separates it from siblings like insider_cluster_buys, insider_amendments_recent, and verify_insider_purchase. An agent can route to it without opening the schema.

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?

The opening sentence gives explicit trigger conditions ('Use when the user asks which insiders bought a stock...'), and the second sentence tells the agent exactly how to shape the call (ticker, start+end, or neither for today). It stops short of naming sibling alternatives or exclusion cases, so it is clear context without full when-not guidance.

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

All TradeStar Insider toolsInspect
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