Skip to main content
Glama

Color

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Resolve Entity

resolve_entity
Read-onlyIdempotent

"What's the ticker for…" / "find the CIK for…" / "what's the LEI for…" / "what's the RxCUI for…" / "look up the ID for…" / "what is X's official identifier" / "who owns X" / "is X a subsidiary of Y" — resolve a user-spoken NAME to the canonical/official identifiers other tools require as input. Use FIRST whenever you have a name but need an ID. SUPPORTED TYPES: "company" (cross-source identity spine: 10-digit CIK + ticker + company_name from SEC EDGAR, legal-entity LEI from GLEIF with parent/ultimate-parent/children ownership when the LEI resolves, and security FIGI from OpenFIGI — by exact ticker map when a ticker is implied, and otherwise by name search, so NON-EQUITY instruments that never have a ticker (municipal and corporate bonds, notes, authority debt) DO resolve here; when a name matches more than one instrument it asserts nothing and returns figi_candidates to pick from, which is the correct answer to an issuer name that does not identify a single bond; every identifier is labelled with the source that established it, and an identifier that could NOT be resolved is stated explicitly under unresolved rather than omitted — accepts ticker, CIK, ISIN, or company name as input; an ISIN like "CH0038863350" resolves to the LEGAL ENTITY that issued the security via the GLEIF ISIN-to-LEI mapping, covering non-US issuers EDGAR cannot reach), "drug" (returns RxCUI + ingredient + brand from RxNorm + pipeworx://rxnorm/concept/{rxcui} citation; accepts brand or generic name). LEI/FIGI enrichment degrades gracefully — if GLEIF or OpenFIGI is unavailable, the EDGAR identifiers still return. Each call cascades through several lookup endpoints internally — using resolve_entity replaces 2-3 manual lookups.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesEntity type: "company" or "drug".
valueYesFor company: ticker (AAPL), CIK (0000320193), or name. For drug: brand or generic name (e.g., "ozempic", "metformin"). Pass the ENTITY NAME ONLY — for a bond that is the ISSUER exactly as printed ("NEW YORK ST DORM AUTH"), never the question's full noun phrase ("NEW YORK ST DORM AUTH revenue bonds"): the FIGI lookup matches instrument names, so trailing security-class words match nothing.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds rich behavioral detail beyond annotations: ambiguous matches return figi_candidates, unresolved identifiers appear under unresolved, ISINs map through GLEIF, enrichment degrades gracefully, and the call cascades internally. Consistent with readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint.

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?

Long and dense, but the length is justified by two entity types, multiple identifier sources, and edge cases. The query examples are front-loaded and the key 'Use FIRST' instruction appears early, though the structure is slightly run-on.

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 carries the burden of explaining return semantics, and it does: it names returned identifiers, labels sources, states unresolved behavior, ambiguous candidates, and failure degradation. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Goes well beyond the schema: it explains the meaning of type/value, gives concrete examples, warns against full noun phrases for bonds, and describes output-specific behaviors like FIGI candidates. With 100% schema coverage, this extra context lifts the parameters well above baseline.

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?

Opens with concrete natural-language examples that map directly to the tool's function, then states the core behavior with a specific verb ('resolve') and resource ('canonical/official identifiers'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by framing the tool as the first step that supplies IDs other tools require as input.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Use FIRST whenever you have a name but need an ID' and lists supported types and acceptable inputs. It does not name sibling tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a fully explicit routing rule.

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

All Color 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools are near-identical: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly the same right now, and the three ask_pipeworx variants plus deep_research all route the same underlying catalog. The six polymarket_* tools also have heavily overlapping purposes, requiring deep reading to choose correctly. Most other tools are distinguishable, but these clusters create real misselection risk.

Naming Consistency3/5

The set is uniformly snake_case and mostly descriptive, with consistent micro-families like remember/recall/forget and polymarket_*. However, there is no single convention across the server: verb_noun names (ask_pipeworx, list_subscriptions) mix with noun-first names (entity_profile, bet_research, nearest_color), and the Pipeworx brand is used as both prefix and suffix. Readable but inconsistent.

Tool Count2/5

At 34 tools, the surface is far larger than a typical well-scoped server, and the count is especially unjustified for a server named 'Color' where only three tools relate to that name. The breadth stems from bolting a full data-research platform, prediction-market suite, memory store, and subscription system onto what appears to be a simple utility. Too heavy.

Completeness4/5

For the dominant Pipeworx research domain, the set is unusually thorough: query, grounded verification, deep research, entity resolution, comparisons, claim validation, change feeds, subscriptions, alerts, memory, and discovery are all present. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct account management tool, and color coverage only includes convert/contrast/nearest with no palette generation), but these are workaround-able. Completeness is strong for the real domain, if mismatched with the server name.

Resources