Skip to main content
Glama

Nba

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. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantial behavioral context: it fans out across SEC, XBRL, patents, contracts, FDA, H-1B, news, and GLEIF; explains USPTO soft-fail behavior; clarifies that empty FDA sections are expected; and defines the resolved:false / notes behavior for private companies. It also explains sources_used / sources_failed semantics so empty sections are not misinterpreted.

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 long, but the tool is genuinely complex with multiple data sources and failure modes. The most important guidance ('ALWAYS PREFER...' and the holistic intent) is front-loaded, and return sections are listed compactly with semicolons. A few example queries are somewhat redundant with the parameter explanation, but the structure earns its length overall.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description bears full responsibility for explaining return behavior. It does this in detail: lists exact output keys, limits, URI formats, sorting, fallback chains, expected-empty cases, failure reporting, and the private-company response. For a tool with this complexity and zero output schema, nothing essential is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by clarifying that `type` values 'company' and 'ticker' are interchangeable, that `value` may be a ticker, zero-padded CIK, or name, and that name resolution happens via SEC EDGAR. This enriches the parameter semantics beyond the terse schema text.

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 opens with concrete invocation examples and states a specific verb+resource: 'full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call.' It clearly distinguishes itself from chained single-pack lookups and sibling tools like resolve_entity by targeting the holistic research use case.

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?

Usage is explicitly tied to user intent: 'when the user asks for a holistic view' and 'ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups.' It also documents valid input modes and the private-company case. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use this tool (e.g., for a single metric or a person) or name specific sibling alternatives.

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

All Nba 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools serve overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research all provide factual lookups with similar boundaries. NBA-specific tools are mixed with generic Pipeworx utilities, making it hard for an agent to distinguish when to use which.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names mix conventions: snake_case (ai_visibility_check), camelCase (generate_llms_txt), and inconsistent verb usage (ask_pipeworx vs. search_players). No clear pattern emerges across the set.

Tool Count2/5

With 34 tools, the server is overpopulated, especially given its 'Nba' focus. Many tools (e.g., remember, forget, list_subscriptions) are generic utilities unrelated to NBA data, inflating the count beyond a coherent scope.

Completeness2/5

For an NBA server, tools are severely incomplete: missing player stats, team stats, season standings, and live game details. While the Pipeworx data tools are extensive, they diverge from the server's apparent purpose, leaving clear gaps.

Resources