Skip to main content
Glama

Edgar

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewAdmin

Edgar Insider Transactions

edgar_insider_transactions
Read-onlyIdempotent

AUTHORITATIVE insider trading activity (SEC Form 3/4/5) for a US public company — who bought or sold, how many shares, at what price, and what they hold now. Pass a ticker ("TSLA") or CIK. Returns each recent Form 4 filing parsed into structured transactions: reporting owner + role (director/officer/10% holder), transaction code (P=open-market purchase, S=sale, A=grant/award, M=option exercise, G=gift, F=tax-withholding), shares, price per share, acquired/disposed, and shares owned after. Use for "insider buying at $TICKER", "did executives sell recently", "latest Form 4 activity". Open-market purchases (code P) are the strongest conviction signal; awards (code A) are routine comp. For the raw filing list use edgar_company_filings with form_type:"4".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax Form 4/3/5 filings to parse (1-25, default 10)
ticker_or_cikYesTicker symbol (e.g., "TSLA") or CIK number (e.g., "1318605")
include_derivativesNoAlso include derivative (options/RSU) transactions. Default false (non-derivative common-stock only).

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 10,
+    "ticker_or_cik": "TSLA"
+  },
+  {
+    "include_derivatives": true,
+    "ticker_or_cik": "1318605"
+  }
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining that the tool parses filings into structured transactions, detailing transaction codes and their significance (e.g., 'P' as strongest conviction signal). It does not contradict annotations.

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 moderately concise for the amount of information conveyed. It is well-structured, starting with the main purpose and return format, then usage examples, transaction code explanations, and a sibling pointer. A slight reduction in redundant phrasing could improve conciseness, but overall it is efficient.

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 comprehensively explains the return structure: reporting owner with role, transaction code, shares, price per share, acquired/disposed, and shares owned after. It covers all essential aspects for using the tool, including parameter examples with realistic values (TSLA, CIK 1318605). The tool's complexity is well-addressed.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds semantic value by explaining how to use 'ticker_or_cik' (pass 'TSLA' or CIK), clarifying that 'include_derivatives' controls inclusion of options/RSU transactions, and introducing transaction code semantics (P, S, A, etc.) beyond 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 clearly states it provides authoritative insider trading activity from SEC Forms 3/4/5, specifying what data is returned (who, shares, price, holdings). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'edgar_company_filings' by directing users there for raw filing lists, thus clearly differentiating its purpose.

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 explicitly lists use cases ('insider buying at $TICKER', 'did executives sell recently', 'latest Form 4 activity') and provides guidance on interpreting transaction codes (e.g., 'P=open-market purchase' as strongest signal vs 'A=award' as routine comp). It also advises on when to use the sibling tool, giving clear contextual usage.

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

All Edgar 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.

Resources