Skip to main content
Glama

Apis Guru

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Recent Changes

recent_changes
Read-onlyIdempotent

"What's new with X" / "latest on Y" / "what happened to Z this week / month / quarter" / "updates on Acme" / "news on Tesla recently" / "what's happening with Apple" — change feed for a company in the last N days/weeks/months in ONE parallel call. Fans out to SEC EDGAR (filings since since), GDELT→GNews fallback (news mentions in window — GDELT preferred, GNews when rate-limited or 5xx), USPTO (patents granted; PatentsView API sunset May 2025 so this soft-fails until reactivated). since accepts ISO date ("2026-04-01") or relative shorthand ("7d", "30d", "3m", "1y"). Returns structured changes[] grouped by source + total_changes count + pipeworx:// citation URIs. Use entity_profile instead when you want the static profile (filings + fundamentals + LEI + patents) regardless of window.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesEntity type. Only "company" supported today.
sinceYesWindow start — ISO date ("2026-04-01") or relative ("7d", "30d", "3m", "1y"). Use "30d" or "1m" for typical monitoring.
valueYesTicker (e.g., "AAPL") or zero-padded CIK (e.g., "0000320193").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate safe, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable context about fan-out to multiple sources, fallback from GDELT to GNews, and soft-fail for USPTO.

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 slightly long but front-loaded with examples and each sentence adds value. It could be more concise, but the structure is effective.

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 missing an output schema, the description explains the return structure (grouped changes, total count, citation URIs) and covers all aspects: input semantics, behavior, fallbacks, and alternative tool. Complete for a complex 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 100%, and the description adds meaning by explaining accepted formats for 'since' (ISO date or relative shorthand with examples), the allowed 'type' value, and that 'value' can be ticker or CIK, with typical usage advice.

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 identifies the tool as a change feed for a company, with specific verb 'change feed for a company', and distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'entity_profile' by stating that the latter should be used for static profiles.

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 provides numerous usage examples and explicitly advises when to use the alternative tool 'entity_profile' instead, offering clear guidance on when to use this tool for dynamic changes vs. static profiles.

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

All Apis Guru toolsInspect
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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes—ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are near-twins (beta currently matches the stable router exactly), and deep_research, entity_profile, recent_changes, and compare_entities all fan out across similar data sources. The long descriptions do help differentiate them, but an agent selecting quickly could easily pick the wrong variant.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use snake_case, but the verb style is inconsistent: get_api, list_providers, and validate_claim use verb_noun, while remember/forget/recall are bare verbs and polymarket_arbitrage, entity_profile, and bet_research are noun phrases. The pattern is readable but not predictable enough to infer behavior from the name alone.

Tool Count2/5

At 35 tools, the surface is heavy, and many are hyper-specialized (five separate Polymarket tools, three ask_pipeworx variants, three memory tools). The breadth is defensible for a multi-domain data platform, but it goes past the comfortable 16-25 range and would benefit from consolidation.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the main research lifecycle well: discovery, routing, grounded answers, entity resolution, profiling, comparison, claim validation, change tracking, subscription management, and memory. Minor gaps exist—such as no explicit fetch-by-citation-URI tool and soft-failed patent coverage—but agents can generally work around them.

Resources