Form4API — SEC Insider Trading

health_ingestion

Read-only

Ingestion-death detector — Form 4 freshness, parse-queue health, price-feed freshness. Returns live (uncached) ingestion health: Form 4 processing freshness (stale after 90 minutes during the weekday 06:00-22:00 US Eastern EDGAR activity window, counted from the later of the last filing and the 06:00 opening; outside it, 14 hours or the time since the window last closed plus 90 minutes, whichever is longer, so a normal weekend never reads as stale), parse-queue health (stale when >50 jobs are pending AND the oldest has waited >45 minutes), and daily price-feed freshness (degraded, never stale, when price bars are >5 days behind). Overall status is "healthy", "degraded" (price feed only), or "stale" (Form 4 or queue). Returns HTTP 503 when stale, 200 otherwise — safe to point an external uptime monitor at directly. No API key or plan required.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses the precise stale thresholds for each of the three signals, the definition of the overall status values, and the HTTP status contract (503 when stale, 200 otherwise). It also states the response is live/uncached and requires no API key — behavior an agent could not derive from the annotations or the empty schema.

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 purpose and the three monitored signals are front-loaded, and the parenthetical threshold definitions are dense but each one earns its place for interpreting the returned status. It is a long single paragraph with nested clauses (the Form 4 weekend rule especially), which costs some readability, but there is little filler.

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 carries the full burden of explaining return values — and it does, enumerating the three overall status values and the HTTP status behavior. Together with the per-signal thresholds and the no-auth note, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema. Baseline of 4 applies, with no param-related gaps to compensate for.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific label ("Ingestion-death detector") and enumerates the three resources monitored: Form 4 freshness, parse-queue health, and price-feed freshness. It clearly differs in scope from transaction-oriented siblings like get_transactions, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with the plausibly overlapping get_data_quality or get_status_history, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

"Safe to point an external uptime monitor at directly" and "no API key or plan required" imply a monitoring/liveness-check use case, which is real contextual guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not-to-use statement and no named alternative among the many sibling status/quality tools, so the agent has to infer routing.

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

All Form4API — SEC 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.