Skip to main content
Glama

Search filings and announcements

search_filings
Read-onlyIdempotent

Semantic search over MOPS filings and announcements — ⚠️ NOT YET AVAILABLE (語意檢索尚未提供/建置中).

★ STATUS, READ FIRST: the semantic index has not been built. Every call currently returns NO
rows, with `corpus.index_is_empty: true` and `corpus.service_status: "not_yet_available"`.
Tell the user this capability is not available yet. Do NOT present it as a working feature,
and do NOT read the empty result as "the company disclosed nothing" — it is a service state,
not a fact about any company.

Once built, it matches on MEANING rather than keywords. The declared corpus is MOPS 重大訊息
subject lines plus a small MOPS full-text set; financial-statement notes do not exist in this
database and company news is refused — `corpus` in every response says exactly what is indexed.

★ POINT-IN-TIME: pass `as_of` (YYYY-MM-DD). Chunks are filtered `published_at <= as_of` in SQL
BEFORE ranking, so a backtest cannot retrieve a filing that did not exist yet. `meta.as_of_applied`
echoes the cutoff that actually ran — check it. **Without `as_of` the results include the most
recent filings and are look-ahead UNSAFE for backtesting**; the response says so in `meta.warnings`.

★ REFERENCE CONTEXT, NOT AUTHORITY. Every hit carries `source`, `source_tier`
("official" = MOPS/exchange, "third_party" = press) and a `url`. Read the chunk and judge it
yourself; the ranking is similarity, not importance, and similarity is not evidence.
**Nothing here is investment advice** (`not_investment_advice: true`).

★ A ticker you asked about that returns nothing appears in `coverage.missing` with a reason.
That means NOTHING IS INDEXED for it under those filters — it does NOT mean the company
disclosed nothing. Do not fill the gap.

Args:
    query: what to look for, in Chinese or English (e.g. '匯率風險', 'CoWoS capacity').
    tickers: restrict to these codes, e.g. ['2330','2317'].
    doc_type: 'mops_major_event' or 'mops_announcement_fulltext' (the only declared types).
    as_of: knowledge-time cutoff 'YYYY-MM-DD' — use it for anything backtest-shaped.
    source_tier: 'official' to exclude third-party press.
    limit: <= 100.
Returns: {data:[{ticker,doc_type,published_at,source,source_tier,url,chunk_text,similarity}],
          meta:{as_of_applied,point_in_time_safe,embedding_model,warnings,query_id},
          provenance:{...}, coverage:{requested,returned,missing,reason}, freshness:{...}}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
as_ofNo
limitNo
queryYes
tickersNo
doc_typeNo
source_tierNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses rich behavior beyond annotations: the semantic index is not built, every call returns empty with corpus flags, point-in-time filtering happens in SQL before ranking, ranking is similarity not importance, and missing tickers mean nothing is indexed. It also clarifies source tiers and explicitly states results are not investment advice.

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 front-loaded with the critical service-status warning and uses clear sections for status, point-in-time behavior, and parameter guidance. It is longer than typical, and the returns section is partly redundant given the output schema, but most content is justified by the tool's complexity and risk.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, critical availability caveat, zero schema descriptions, and output schema, the description is complete. It covers status, corpus boundaries, point-in-time safety, source tiers, missing coverage semantics, parameters, and response shape.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It explains each parameter's meaning, examples for query and tickers, allowed doc_type values, as_of semantics, source_tier behavior, and the limit cap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: semantic search over MOPS filings and announcements, including the exact corpus and excluded document types. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as read_primary_text or query_dataset, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives clear usage conditions: use as_of for backtest-shaped queries, use source_tier='official' to exclude press, and do not treat empty results as company non-disclosure. It does not name alternative sibling tools for cases where this service is unavailable, leaving that inference to the agent.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources