Agent Utils (x402)

by dev.workers.revenue-agent-jw.agent-utils-x402-production

SEC 13F institutional holdings

sec_13f_holdings

Read-onlyIdempotent

SEC 13F-HR institutional holdings for a filer by CIK or ticker (latest quarter or a given accession), parsed from the EDGAR information table. Useful for tracking what funds like Berkshire Hathaway hold. Returns period, holdings ranked by value with issuer, CUSIP, class, shares, put/call and portfolio percent, totals checked against the cover page, recent 13F filings and source URLs. Tables over 1.5 MB return 422. Errors: 400, 404 no 13F. PAID: $0.001 USDC per call on Base via x402 (MCP transport: retry with params._meta["x402/payment"]). Same tool over plain HTTP: GET /v1/sec/13f.

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": "sec_13f_holdings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cik`	No	13F filer CIK, e.g. 0001067983
`limit`	No	holdings returned, default 50
`ticker`	No	alternative to cik when the filer is listed
`accession`	No	specific 13F accession number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations, the description discloses return fields, cover-page total validation, the 1.5 MB table limit with 422 behavior, 400/404 error conditions, and paid x402 payment handling. This is substantial behavioral context that annotations alone do not provide.

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 dense and front-loaded: purpose, return contents, constraints, errors, and payment mechanics appear in a logical order. Every sentence carries operational value, including the x402 retry detail and HTTP endpoint.

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?

With no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the returned data, including period, ranked holdings, issuer/CUSIP details, totals, recent filings, and source URLs. It also covers payment, error, and transport behavior needed to call the tool correctly.

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 already 100%, so the schema documents the parameters. The description still adds meaning by clarifying that CIK or ticker identifies the filer, that accession selects a specific 13F, and that the default is the latest quarter.

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 states a specific verb and resource: SEC 13F-HR institutional holdings for a filer by CIK or ticker, parsed from the EDGAR information table. The explicit '13F-HR' scope distinguishes it from general SEC filing siblings such as sec_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 gives a usage example ('tracking what funds like Berkshire Hathaway hold') and explains CIK, ticker, and accession selection, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus sibling filing tools or when not to use it.

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

All Agent Utils (x402) tools Inspect

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

Need Help?