mcp_get_sec_filing
Fetch metadata + index URL for one SEC filing by accession number.
Args: accession_number: EDGAR accession number (e.g. '0001193125-21-000001').
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| accession_number | Yes |
pubrecords
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; description only states it fetches metadata and index URL, omitting any permissions, side effects, or rate limits. Minimal disclosure leaves agent uncertain about safety.
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?
Two concise sentences plus Args block. Front-loaded with main purpose. Minor verbosity in structured Args format but overall efficient.
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?
Explains fetched data (metadata and index URL) and required parameter. Lacks response structure details, but acceptable given no output schema and simple tool.
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 0%, but description adds example format for accession number (e.g., '0001193125-21-000001'). Provides meaningful guidance beyond bare schema parameter name.
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?
Description clearly specifies verb ('fetch'), resource ('SEC filing'), and key parameter ('accession number'). Distinguishes from sibling 'mcp_search_sec_filings' which searches, while this fetches a specific filing.
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?
Implies usage when accession number is known, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to siblings like 'mcp_search_sec_filings'.
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.
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct public records source (company, SEC, UCC, spending, NPI, courts, licenses) with clear differentiation between search and retrieval operations. Minimal overlap and no ambiguity.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent 'mcp_verb_noun' pattern using get, lookup, search, and verify. No mixed conventions or irregular naming.
Tool Count5/5
10 tools cover a broad range of public records domains without being overwhelming. Each tool earns its place by targeting a specific source or operation.
Completeness3/5
The set covers many common public records, but mcp_get_ucc_filings is a roadmap stub returning not_implemented, which is a significant functional gap. Missing sources like property or criminal records are expected, but the non-functional tool hurts completeness.