Skip to main content
Glama

SEC Filing Digest

get_sec_filing_digest
Read-only

Digest of a public company's latest SEC filings (10-K, 10-Q, 8-K), recent insider filings and key annual financials. Source: SEC EDGAR. Price: $0.01 USDC per call via x402 (charged only on success).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_sec_filing_digest"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cikNoSEC CIK number (alternative to ticker)
tickerNoUS stock ticker, e.g. AAPL

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the read-only/open-world profile, and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the data source (SEC EDGAR) and pricing ($0.01 USDC per call, charged only on success), which matters before an agent decides to invoke. It does not cover failure behavior for unknown tickers or whether responses are cached/fresh.

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?

Two sentences, no filler: the content scope comes first, then source and cost. Every clause carries information an agent would otherwise have to guess.

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 enumeration of included filing types and financials effectively conveys what comes back, and cost/source round out the picture. Missing are the ticker-vs-CIK requirement and error behavior, which matter for correct invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both cik and ticker are already documented, and the description adds no format or selection guidance. Notably it omits the key operational fact that at least one identifier must be supplied even though the schema marks zero parameters required.

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?

States a specific resource set: latest 10-K/10-Q/8-K filings, insider filings, and annual financials for a public company, sourced from SEC EDGAR. No sibling tool touches SEC filings, so differentiation is implicit rather than stated, which keeps it from 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 Guidelines3/5

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

The domain is clear enough that usage is inferable, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisite (e.g., a valid US-listed company), and no alternative named. The sibling list is unrelated enough that this omission costs less, but the guidance is implied only.

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