Skip to main content
Glama

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

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds behavioral details beyond annotations: fallback from GDELT to GNews on rate limits, USPTO soft-fail, return structure with grouped changes and citation URIs. Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, so description complements effectively.

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?

Description is dense but well-organized: starts with example queries, then sources/behavior, then parameter details, and ends with alternative. All information is relevant, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) to improve scanability.

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?

Given the tool has 3 required params and no output schema, the description thoroughly explains sources, fallbacks, return format (grouped changes, total count, URIs), and limitations (USPTO soft-fail). Complete for an agent to understand usage and expectations.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds extra meaning: explains 'since' accepts relative shorthand and links to examples, and 'value' allows ticker or CIK. This goes beyond the schema alone, justifying a 4.

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 states the tool provides a change feed for a company across SEC, news, and patents sources in one parallel call, and distinguishes from the sibling tool entity_profile 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?

Explicitly says when to use (change feed queries) and when not to ('Use entity_profile instead when you want the static profile'), providing clear context and an alternative.

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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes with thorough descriptions, but ask_pipeworx_beta is currently identical to ask_pipeworx, and the five polymarket_* tools plus three ask_pipeworx variants form overlapping clusters that could cause misselection without careful reading.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names fall into recognizable families (list_*, read_*, fetch_*, polymarket_*, ask_pipeworx_*), but conventions are mixed: bare verbs like remember/forget, noun phrases like entity_profile/recent_alerts, and product-prefixed names. Predictable within families but inconsistent across the full set.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools far exceeds the 25+ threshold and the typical well-scoped server. The bulk of tools—Pipeworx data access, Polymarket analysis, memory, subscriptions—go far beyond what a 'Climate Feeds' server name implies, making the set feel bloated and unfocused.

Completeness4/5

For its actual (much broader-than-named) scope, the surface is remarkably complete: query, grounded verification, research, comparison, entity resolution, memory, subscriptions, feedback, and discovery all exist. Minor gaps remain—subscriptions cannot monitor arbitrary RSS feeds, and there is no update operation for subscriptions.