Skip to main content
Glama

Equibles

by io.github.daniel3303
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Non-GAAP to GAAP Bridge

GetNonGaapBridge
Read-only

Get a company's non-GAAP-to-GAAP reconciliations ('bridges') as extracted from its earnings releases and 10-K/10-Q periodic reports: for each stated non-GAAP measure (Adjusted EBITDA, adjusted EPS, adjusted operating income, FFO/AFFO, ...), the GAAP starting line, each stated adjustment in order, and the non-GAAP result, with the period, unit and the verbatim source quote. Verifier-approved, newest filing first. Use this to see exactly how a company builds its adjusted numbers; GetCompanyKpis carries the same bridge inline with a metric, this returns the reconciliations on their own.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of source filings to read, newest first (default 6, valid 1-20; out-of-range values are clamped)
offsetNoNumber of approved source filings to skip before returning rows (default 0)
tickerYesCompany ticker symbol (e.g., AAPL, MSFT)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Number of approved source filings to skip before returning rows (default 0)",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses that results are verifier-approved, ordered newest filing first, and sourced from specific report types. These are useful behavioral traits that inform trust and usage expectations.

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 detailed but every part earns its place: it defines the resource, enumerates content, states provenance and ordering, and ends with a crisp usage distinction from a sibling tool. The key usage guidance is front-loaded and clear.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description fully explains what the return data will contain, including the adjustment chain, period, unit, and source quote, and notes ordering. Combined with complete parameter documentation, an agent has enough to call this tool correctly.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% and each parameter (ticker, limit, offset) already has a clear schema description. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable at the baseline given the high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool returns non-GAAP-to-GAAP reconciliations as extracted from earnings releases and periodic filings, and details what each bridge contains (GAAP starting line, adjustments, non-GAAP result, period, unit, verbatim quote). It also explicitly distinguishes this from GetCompanyKpis, making sibling differentiation immediate.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description says to use this tool to see how a company builds its adjusted numbers, and explicitly names GetCompanyKpis as the alternative that carries the same bridge inline with a metric. This gives an agent a clear selection rule between the two tools.

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