Skip to main content
Glama

Maryland MVA

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Entity Profile

entity_profile
Read-onlyIdempotent

"Tell me about X" / "research Acme" / "brief me on Tesla" / "what does Apple do" / "company profile for Microsoft" / "give me the rundown on NVDA" / "everything you know about $TICKER" — full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call. ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view. Fans out across SEC EDGAR, XBRL, USPTO patents, federal contracts (USAspending), FDA-licensed biologics (Purple Book), H-1B hiring (DOL LCA), news and GLEIF, and returns: cik + company_name (+ resolved_from/resolved_to when value was a name); recent_filings (up to 5 with pipeworx://edgar/company/{cik}/filings/{accession} URIs); fundamentals (LATEST 10-K Revenues + NetIncomeLoss + Cash, sorted period_end DESC); patents (USPTO PatentsView API sunset May 2025 — soft-fails until reactivated); federal_contracts (USAspending awards where the company is the recipient); fda_products (FDA-licensed biologics — vaccines, cell/gene therapies — from the Purple Book; a company with only small-molecule/generic drugs will show none here, that is expected, not a failure); hiring (H-1B sponsorship volume + salary range from DOL LCA filings); recent news mentions via GDELT→GNews fallback; LEI via GLEIF. sources_used / sources_failed say which of these actually returned data for THIS company — an empty section is a real "no data", not a bug. Pass a ticker ("AAPL"), zero-padded CIK ("0000320193"), OR a company name ("Moderna") — names now resolve via SEC EDGAR's company-name match; a private company (no CIK/ticker) returns resolved:false with an explicit notes line, not a bare failure. type accepts "company" or "ticker" interchangeably — both take the same value shapes above.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes"company" or "ticker" — both are accepted and behave identically; `value` can be a ticker, CIK, or company name either way. person/place coming soon.
valueYesTicker (e.g., "AAPL"), zero-padded CIK (e.g., "0000320193"), or company name (e.g., "Moderna") — names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Previous value: -"Entity type. Only \"company\" supported today; person/place coming soon."New value: +"\"company\" or \"ticker\" — both are accepted and behave identically; `value` can be a ticker, CIK, or company name either way. person/place coming soon."
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "company"
-]New value: +[
+  "company",
+  "ticker"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / value / description
      Previous value: -"Ticker (e.g., \"AAPL\") or zero-padded CIK (e.g., \"0000320193\"). Names not supported — use resolve_entity first if you only have a name."New value: +"Ticker (e.g., \"AAPL\"), zero-padded CIK (e.g., \"0000320193\"), or company name (e.g., \"Moderna\") — names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, and the description layers substantial behavior on top: per-source soft-fail semantics (USPTO PatentsView sunset), the "empty section is a real no-data, not a bug" contract, expected-empty FDA results for small-molecule-only companies, and resolved:false-with-notes handling for private companies. Nothing contradicts the 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 front-loaded with intent examples and the core value proposition, and nearly every clause earns its place — source list, failure semantics, input forms, edge cases. However, it is a dense single run-on paragraph that intermixes input handling, output shape, and failure semantics with semicolon-chained clauses, which hurts scannability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a high-complexity tool with no output schema, the description carries the burden well: it enumerates the source fan-out, key return fields (cik, company_name, resolved_from/to, recent_filings with URIs, fundamentals), and the sources_used/sources_failed contract. It still omits the return shapes of the news, hiring, and LEI sections and leaves the fundamentals detail abbreviated, so the output contract is not fully specified.

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 description coverage is 100% — the schema already documents type's interchangeable enum and value's ticker/CIK/name formats with the same examples. The description adds the resolved_from/resolved_to output nuance tied to name input, which is useful context, but it is output-oriented and the core parameter semantics remain schema-carried.

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 leads with concrete user-intent triggers ("Tell me about X", "research Acme", "brief me on Tesla") and pins the scope as a "full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call." It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly declaring "ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups," naming the alternative it should win against.

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?

The "ALWAYS PREFER ... when the user asks for a holistic view" directive gives an explicit when-to-use rule with a named alternative, and the input-format guidance (ticker, zero-padded CIK, company name) plus private-company behavior clarifies expected usage. It stops short of exclusions — it never says when to pick compare_entities, deep_research, or resolve_entity instead — so the when-not side is incomplete.

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

All Maryland MVA 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are distinct, but there are several problematic clusters: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta (which admits it is currently identical to the stable router), and ask_pipeworx_grounded can easily be misselected. The Polymarket tools (bet_research, polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_fill_risk) also have fuzzy boundaries around 'find me an edge', and compare_entities/entity_profile/recent_changes all offer one-call company research.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming is overwhelmingly lowercase snake_case with a verb-first pattern (ask_, generate_, list_, resolve_, subscribe, recall). Deviations include the md_dmv_ prefix on two tools, the noun-led entity_profile, and bare verbs like forget/remember/recall, but the overall style remains readable and predictable.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is well into the bloated range for a single server, and the sprawl is worsened by the fact that only 2 of the 33 tools actually relate to the server's stated name, 'Maryland MVA.' The rest form an unrelated Pipeworx data/prediction-market/memory/meta-toolkit that could either be split into separate servers or consolidated behind the universal router.

Completeness3/5

For the actual Pipeworx domain, coverage is broad: universal routing, grounded answering, deep research, entity profiles, comparisons, claim validation, memory, and subscriptions are all present. However, for the server's apparent purpose — Maryland MVA — coverage is nearly empty: only vehicle registration counts and EV adoption exist, with no driver services, fees, offices, titles, or licensing operations. The direct tool surface also has holes (stock prices, weather, etc.) that only the meta-router papers over.

Resources