Valuein — SEC EDGAR Fundamentals & Smart-Money Data

Generate Peer Comparables Workbook (xlsx)

generate_comps_xlsx

Render a peer comparables table into an Excel workbook. The Comps sheet is formatted as a named Excel Table (ValueinPeerComps) so the user gets one-click Insert Chart on any column — the cleanest workaround for not embedding chart objects server-side. Subject-row highlight makes side-by-side comparison instant. A Summary sheet adds subject vs peer-median deltas.

SERVER-TRUST: the ratios you pass are rendered as-supplied and are NOT re-derived by Valuein, so the workbook carries a visible 'figures supplied by caller, not verified by Valuein' watermark (response verification.status = 'unverified'). For authoritative numbers, source them from get_peer_comparables / get_financial_ratios first.

Pair with get_peer_comparables for a typical flow.

Tier: pro+.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notes`	No	Optional free-text note (≤500 chars) rendered on the Summary sheet.
`peers`	Yes	Peer companies to tabulate against the subject (1–50 rows); each row carries the peer's ticker, name, and comparable ratio values.
`subject_ticker`	Yes	Stock ticker symbol of the subject company the comps sheet is built around, e.g. AAPL.
`subject_company_name`	No	Optional display name for the subject company; falls back to the ticker if omitted.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes
`_meta`	Yes	Provenance envelope — data lineage for every MCP response
`r2_key`	Yes
`filename`	Yes
`expires_at`	Yes
`size_bytes`	Yes
`content_type`	Yes
`verification`	Yes	Server-trust record. Comps ratios are rendered as supplied and are NOT re-derived by Valuein, so the workbook carries a visible 'figures supplied by caller' watermark. Pull authoritative ratios via get_peer_comparables / get_financial_ratios.
`expires_in_seconds`	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"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedJun 19, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / verification

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Server-trust record. Comps ratios are rendered as supplied and are NOT re-derived by Valuein, so the workbook carries a visible 'figures supplied by caller' watermark. Pull authoritative ratios via get_peer_comparables / get_financial_ratios.",
+  "properties": {
+    "note": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "const": "unverified",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "note"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "_meta",
-  "url",
-  "r2_key",
-  "filename",
-  "content_type",
-  "size_bytes",
-  "expires_in_seconds",
-  "expires_at"
-]New value: +[
+  "_meta",
+  "url",
+  "r2_key",
+  "filename",
+  "content_type",
+  "size_bytes",
+  "expires_in_seconds",
+  "expires_at",
+  "verification"
+]

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"
```

Changed4 schema fields changedJun 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / notes / description

Added value: +"Optional free-text note (≤500 chars) rendered on the Summary sheet."

addedInput schema / properties / peers / description

Added value: +"Peer companies to tabulate against the subject (1–50 rows); each row carries the peer's ticker, name, and comparable ratio values."

addedInput schema / properties / subject_company_name / description

Added value: +"Optional display name for the subject company; falls back to the ticker if omitted."

addedInput schema / properties / subject_ticker / description

Added value: +"Stock ticker symbol of the subject company the comps sheet is built around, e.g. AAPL."

AddedMay 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral transparency beyond the sparse boolean annotations. It discloses the server-trust model, that ratios are rendered as-supplied, that the workbook carries an 'unverified' watermark, and that response verification.status equals 'unverified'. It also describes output structure (Comps and Summary sheets) without contradicting any annotation.

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 the core purpose and then organized into useful sections, including the SERVER-TRUST callout. It is a bit longer than necessary—some formatting details like 'one-click Insert Chart' and 'Tier: pro+' are helpful but not essential—so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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 tool with only four params, complete schema coverage, a rich behavioral disclosure, and an output schema, the description is comprehensive. It covers the output format, verification semantics, typical pairing, and data-sourcing expectations, leaving no critical gap for an agent to call it correctly.

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?

Input schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds some contextual meaning about how values are used (ratios rendered as-supplied, subject vs peer-median deltas) but does not go into parameter-specific behavior, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'Render a peer comparables table into an Excel workbook.' It clearly identifies the domain (peer comps) and distinguishes this from sibling workbook generators like generate_dcf_xlsx and generate_lbo_xlsx by naming its unique output features (named Excel table, Summary sheet, subject-row highlight).

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 description gives clear usage context: 'Pair with get_peer_comparables for a typical flow' and tells agents to source authoritative numbers from get_peer_comparables / get_financial_ratios first. It does not explicitly enumerate when-not-to-use alternatives, hence not a 5, but the guidance is unambiguous.

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.