Fintel Discovery — Financial Intelligence for AI Agents

Search SEC IAPD — RIA Firms

SearchIAPDFirm

Read-onlyIdempotent

    Search the SEC Investment Adviser Public Disclosure (IAPD) database for
    registered investment advisor (RIA) firms by name. Returns firm CRD,
    registration status, AUM, employee count, state, and office city.

    Use this tool when:
    - You need the CRD or AUM for a named RIA firm
    - You are looking up Form ADV data for a firm
    - You want to distinguish between RIA firms (use IAPD) vs BD firms (use BrokerCheck)

    Geographic workflow: if you have a firm name from SearchBrokersByPlace and
    the firm is an RIA (registered investment advisor), search here to get the
    CRD, AUM, and regulatory status. Then use GetIAPDFirmDetail for full ADV data.

    Note: IAPD covers RIAs registered with the SEC. For broker-dealers,
    use SearchBrokerCheckFirm instead.

    Source: SEC IAPD public API. No API key required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: the source is the public SEC IAPD API, no API key is required, and the search covers SEC-registered RIAs only. It also discloses the returned data fields.

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?

The description is front-loaded with a clear one-sentence summary, then uses bullets and explicit workflow guidance. It is mildly redundant, repeating the RIA-vs-BrokerCheck distinction twice, and the geographic-workflow paragraph is slightly tangential, but overall every section still earns its place.

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?

Given output schema presence and annotations covering read-only safety, the description supplies enough context for an agent to select and call the tool confidently. It explains scope, inputs, outputs, source, and related-tool flow. Minor gaps: it doesn't mention whether the name is required or behavior when omitted, and it doesn't address pagination or result limits.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does clarify the core parameter—searching by firm name—but it does not explain the wrapper `params` structure or the optional parameters such as wholesaler_ids, source_resource_id, exclude_fillers. The main invocation path is clear, but advanced parameter usage is left entirely to 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 names a specific verb, resource, and subject: 'Search the SEC Investment Adviser Public Disclosure (IAPD) database for registered investment advisor (RIA) firms by name.' It also states the returned fields and clearly differentiates this tool from BrokerCheck and individual-IAPD searches.

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?

Explicit 'Use this tool when' bullets define the intended scenarios, and the description gives a clear alternative: 'For broker-dealers, use SearchBrokerCheckFirm instead.' It also provides a concrete workflow connecting SearchBrokersByPlace to this tool and then to GetIAPDFirmDetail.

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

All Fintel Discovery — Financial Intelligence for AI Agents tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource and action, with clear separation between search and detail tools (e.g., SearchIAPDFirm vs GetIAPDFirmDetail, SearchBrokerCheck vs GetBrokerCheckDetail). A few pairs like SearchBrokerCheck and SearchBrokerCheckFirm could cause momentary confusion, but descriptions clarify individual vs firm scope.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant pattern is consistent: Search* for discovery, Get* for retrieval, with CamelCase throughout. Minor deviations like LookupTicker and MapInstrumentIds introduce different verbs, and SearchBrokerCheck does not explicitly signal 'individual' unlike SearchBrokerCheckFirm, but the overall convention remains predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 32 tools, the surface is quite heavy and exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many.' While the financial intelligence domain is broad, several search/detail pairs and overlapping data-source tools could be consolidated to reduce cognitive load for agents.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers major workflows well: 13F holdings, fund fee comparison, advisor due diligence, macro data, price history, options, and identifier mapping. Minor gaps exist, such as no standalone real-time quote tool, no news/sentiment data, and no direct CUSIP-to-company-name search, but these are workable around.

Resources

Need Help?