Skip to main content
Glama

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

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond that: it fans out across named sources, returns resolved_from/resolved_to, provides URI-bearing filings, and explains that sources_failed/sources_used distinguish real 'no data' from bugs. The empty-section explanation and private-company resolved:false note are exactly the kind of behavioral transparency an agent needs.

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 it is dense with necessary information: examples, source list, return fields, failure semantics, and input rules. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and usage trigger, then moves to return details and edge cases. It could be slightly more scannable, but virtually every sentence contributes to correct tool use.

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 must explain what the agent will receive, and it does: CIK/company_name, resolved_from/resolved_to, recent_filings URIs, key fundamentals, sources_used/sources_failed, and the private-company behavior. It also covers source-specific caveats and the type/value contract. For a broad tool of this complexity, the description is remarkably complete for selection and invocation.

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?

The input schema already covers both parameters at 100%, including enum values and descriptions. The description adds value by giving concrete examples ('AAPL', '0000320193', 'Moderna'), clarifying zero-padded CIKs, and explicitly stating that type='company' and type='ticker' are interchangeable. This goes beyond the schema, though the schema already carries most of the semantic weight.

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 user phrasings and immediately states the core action: 'full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call.' It is specific about the resource (US public company), the output (multi-source profile), and how it differs from chained single-pack lookups. The examples of ticker, CIK, and company-name inputs further pin down exactly what the tool accepts.

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 says to 'ALWAYS PREFER' this tool over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view. It also specifies accepted input forms and what happens for private companies, giving an agent clear conditions for when the tool will succeed vs. return resolved:false. This is direct, actionable usage guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools overlap in purpose: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, ask_pipeworx_beta, and deep_research all perform similar data lookups with slight variations. Prediction market tools (bet_research, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges) also overlap. Only the three PDBe-specific tools are clearly distinct, but overall the set is confusing.

Naming Consistency1/5

Tool names follow no consistent pattern: some are verb_noun (ask_pipeworx, get_molecules), others are noun_verb (ai_visibility_check), or have mixed conventions (generate_llms_txt, uniprot_mappings). The variety of verbs (ask, bet, compare, discover, generate, get, list, recall, remember) makes it hard to predict tool names.

Tool Count2/5

With 34 tools, the server is overstuffed for a single domain. It mixes PDBe-specific tools (3) with a large set of general-purpose data tools, prediction market tools, subscriptions, and memory tools. This bloat suggests the server should be split into focused services.

Completeness1/5

For the stated PDBe domain, only three tools exist (get_molecules, get_summary, uniprot_mappings), missing essential operations like search, download, or advanced queries. The server's overall purpose is unclear, and it feels like a random collection of tools rather than a coherent API.