Skip to main content
Glama

Equibles

by io.github.daniel3303
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Funds Holding a Stock

GetFundsHoldingStock
Read-only

Get the registered investment companies (mutual funds and ETFs) holding an exact stock or ETF listing, from SEC Form NPORT-P portfolio reports. The listed security's authoritative CUSIP is matched against the holding rows on each fund series' most recent report (series that stopped filing more than 18 months ago are excluded), so an exited position never shows as current. Returns the fund's registrant and series, the reporting period, the position size, its U.S.-dollar value, its share of the fund's net assets and the payoff profile (Long/Short), largest positions first. Report dates differ per fund series (each files on its own fiscal quarter), so values are as of each row's report date and cross-row totals mix as-of dates.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
offsetNoNumber of matching fund positions to skip before returning rows (default: 0)
tickerYesListed security ticker (e.g., AAPL, VOO)
maxResultsNoMaximum number of fund positions to return, largest first (default: 20, clamped to 1-500)
registrantOrSeriesNoOptional registrant or series name filter (case-insensitive contains, e.g. 'Vanguard') — reaches positions beyond the largest 500

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / ticker / description
      Previous value: -"Stock ticker symbol (e.g., AAPL, MSFT)"New value: +"Listed security ticker (e.g., AAPL, VOO)"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Number of matching fund positions to skip before returning rows (default: 0)",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail: exact CUSIP matching, exclusion of funds that stopped filing more than 18 months ago, the guarantee that exited positions never show as current, and the caveat that report dates differ and cross-row totals mix as-of dates. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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 but not bloated; each sentence carries distinct information: purpose/source, matching logic and exclusions, returned fields and ordering, and the date-mixing caveat. It is front-loaded with the primary use case and contains no filler.

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 compensates by enumerating what is returned: registrant, series, reporting period, position size, dollar value, share of net assets, and payoff profile. It also covers edge behavior around report dates and stale filings, making the tool's behavior predictable enough for an agent to invoke and interpret 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value by explaining how 'ticker' works via authoritative CUSIP matching, that results are ordered 'largest positions first' (relevant to maxResults), and that 'registrantOrSeries' lets you reach positions beyond the largest 500. This enriches the parameters without duplicating the schema.

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 opens with a precise verb and resource: 'Get the registered investment companies (mutual funds and ETFs) holding an exact stock or ETF listing, from SEC Form NPORT-P portfolio reports.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like GetInstitutionPortfolio by specifying the data source and entity type. The exactness of security matching is also stated, leaving no ambiguity about scope.

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 description gives clear context about when this tool applies: when you need mutual fund or ETF holdings from NPORT-P filings, with recent-report and 18-month staleness constraints. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5 but provides strong situational context.

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

All Equibles 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