Insider Trading

Insider Activity Summary

insider_activity_summary

Read-onlyIdempotent

One-call SEC filing overview for a US-listed company: Form 4 insider transactions and 8-K material events from the last 90 days plus Schedule 13D/G stake filings from the last year, with counts and the most recent rows of each. Answers what has been happening at a company lately, for quick due diligence. Response field matched_by says whether the company was matched by ticker or by company name.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ticker": "AAPL"
    },
    "name": "insider_activity_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ticker`	Yes	Stock ticker ("AAPL", "TSLA", "NVDA"), company name, or CIK

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cik`	No	SEC CIK the ticker resolved to (unpadded)
`ticker`	Yes	Stock ticker in uppercase
`summary`	Yes
`matched_by`	No	How the company was matched: ticker, cik or company_name
`company_name`	No	Canonical SEC registrant name
`activist_filings`	Yes
`recent_8k_events`	Yes
`recent_insider_trades`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 15, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / matched_by

Added value: +{
+  "description": "How the company was matched: ticker, cik or company_name",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world semantics, so the description's job is to add context — and it does: it discloses coverage windows (90 days for Form 4/8-K, one year for 13D/G), that results are counts plus most-recent rows (an implicit truncation/summarization behavior), and the meaning of the matched_by field. That truncation detail is genuinely useful for an agent expecting a complete list.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core scope and windows before the usage framing. Every sentence carries information; no filler or repetition of the title.

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 a single fully-documented parameter, an output schema present, and rich annotations, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: what filings are covered, the time horizons, summary-vs-full behavior, and the match-resolution field. Nothing material is left ambiguous.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents that the single parameter accepts ticker, company name, or CIK. The description adds only the matched_by echo behavior, which is tangential to parameter meaning. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('One-call SEC filing overview') and enumerates exactly which filing types are aggregated (Form 4, 8-K, Schedule 13D/G) with their time windows. An agent can distinguish this consolidated view from the individual insider_13d/insider_8k/insider_trades siblings purely from the description.

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?

'Answers what has been happening at a company lately, for quick due diligence' gives clear usage context. It stops short of explicitly saying when to prefer the single-filing-type siblings over this aggregate, so it falls just below the explicit-alternatives bar.

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

All Insider Trading tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.