Valuein — SEC EDGAR Fundamentals & Smart-Money Data

Delete Claim

delete_claim

DestructiveIdempotent

Soft-delete a claim by id. The row and its score history are preserved for audit (archived, not erased); the claim drops out of default list_claims results. Idempotent — deleting an already-archived claim succeeds.

Tier: all paid + free tiers (sample rejected).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`claim_id`	Yes	Id of the claim to archive.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`_meta`	Yes	Provenance envelope — data lineage for every MCP response
`archived`	Yes
`claim_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / fundamentals_as_of / description

Previous value: -"ISO timestamp when the FINANCIAL STATEMENTS were last rebuilt. Use THIS — not `last_updated` — when telling a user how current the fundamentals are. The snapshot is republished on every weekday price refresh while the statements are carried forward unchanged, so `last_updated` can be far more recent than the numbers it sits next to."New value: +"ISO timestamp when the FINANCIAL STATEMENTS were last rebuilt in bulk. Use THIS — not `last_updated` — when telling a user how current the cross-sectional fundamentals are. The snapshot is republished on every weekday price refresh while the statements are carried forward unchanged, so `last_updated` can be far more recent than the numbers it sits next to. It is a floor for a single filer, not a ceiling: a filer with a live partition receives its filing, facts and ratios intraday (minutes after EDGAR dissemination), so an entity-scoped read may carry a filing newer than this; cross-sectional ranks (factor scores, earnings signals) refresh with the weekly bulk export."

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 25, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / fundamentals_as_of

Added value: +{
+  "description": "ISO timestamp when the FINANCIAL STATEMENTS were last rebuilt. Use THIS — not `last_updated` — when telling a user how current the fundamentals are. The snapshot is republished on every weekday price refresh while the statements are carried forward unchanged, so `last_updated` can be far more recent than the numbers it sits next to.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / price_as_of

Added value: +{
+  "description": "ISO timestamp when the price surfaces were last refreshed.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 7, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / cost_usd

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Per-call cost transparency. Omitted for subscription-only tools that have no PAYG-equivalent price.",
+  "properties": {
+    "amount_usd": {
+      "minimum": 0,
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "basis": {
+      "description": "payg_charge = real agent-pay charge. payg_rate_card = indicative price, not billed.",
+      "enum": [
+        "payg_charge",
+        "payg_rate_card"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "billed": {
+      "description": "true = this amount was actually charged via PAYG for this call. false = indicative PAYG-equivalent value; your plan already covers this call for free.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "amount_usd",
+    "billed",
+    "basis"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / latency_ms

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Wall-clock milliseconds this tool call took, measured server-side around the handler.",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedJun 18, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / pit_safe / description
```
Added value: +"true iff a zero-look-ahead point-in-time cut was applied to every returned figure"
```
AddedMay 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description explains the concrete semantics: the row and score history stay for audit, the claim disappears from default list results, and repeating the delete on an already-archived claim succeeds. This meaningfully elaborates what 'destructive' and 'idempotent' mean here.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The most important verb and object are front-loaded in the first sentence, and the remaining sentences each add distinct value: soft-delete effects, idempotency, and tier access. There is no filler or repetition of schema content.

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?

For a single-parameter mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers what happens to the record, the visibility effect, idempotency, and access eligibility. Nothing needed for correct invocation appears missing.

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?

With one required parameter and 100% schema description coverage ('Id of the claim to archive'), the schema already fully explains the parameter. The description adds only 'by id,' which does not go beyond the schema, so 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?

The description opens with 'Soft-delete a claim by id' — a specific verb plus resource and scope. It clarifies that the delete is an archive operation ('archived, not erased') and differentiates the effect from hard deletion and from other delete_* siblings.

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?

The description implies usage: if you want to remove a claim from default list_claims results while preserving it for audit, this is the tool. It also includes a tier restriction ('sample rejected') as access context, but it does not explicitly name alternatives such as restore_deleted or unpublish_claim or give when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Valuein — SEC EDGAR Fundamentals & Smart-Money Data 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.