Skip to main content
Glama

Valuein — SEC EDGAR Fundamentals & Smart-Money Data

by io.github.valuein

SEC Filing Links

get_sec_filing_links
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get direct links to original SEC EDGAR filings for any US public company. Returns four per-filing deep links: sec_url (the EDGAR filing-index page listing every document), viewer_url (the cgi-bin Financial-Report viewer for the specific accession), inline_viewer_url (the SEC Inline-XBRL viewer opened on the rendered primary document — the strongest provenance link, null when the filing is not Inline-XBRL), and document_url (a direct link to the rendered primary document itself — opens the actual filing, never the index page, null only when primary_document is unknown). Prefer inline_viewer_url ?? document_url ?? viewer_url ?? sec_url. Supported form_types (enum): 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, 20-F, 40-F, 10-K/A, 10-Q/A, 20-F/A, 40-F/A. Other forms (6-K, DEF 14A, Form 4, 13F) are NOT yet exposed by this tool — use describe_schema to confirm the parquet has them, then read raw via the SDK. 8-K item codes are filterable via event_types (e.g. ['2.02'] for earnings, ['1.01'] for material agreements, ['5.02'] for officer changes). PIT-safe — filings are filtered by accepted_at, never by report_date alone. Use this instead of verify_fact_lineage when you want a list of filings; use verify_fact_lineage when you want one specific fact-to-filing trace. Available on all plans.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of filings to return (1–50). Defaults to 10.
tickerYesStock ticker symbol, e.g. AAPL, MSFT
end_dateNoInclusive upper bound on filing_date (YYYY-MM-DD). E.g. '2023-12-31'.
form_typesNoFiling form types to include. Defaults to 10-K and 10-Q.
start_dateNoInclusive lower bound on filing_date (YYYY-MM-DD). E.g. '2023-01-01'.
event_typesNo8-K item codes to filter by. E.g. ['1.01'] for material agreements, ['2.01'] for asset acquisitions, ['5.02'] for director/officer changes. Only relevant when form_types includes '8-K'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_metaYesProvenance envelope — data lineage for every MCP response
tickerYes
filingsYes
filings_returnedYes

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent. Description adds rich behavioral detail: null conditions for `inline_viewer_url` and `document_url`, preferred link order, PIT-safe filtering by `accepted_at`, and limit/maximum behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Well-structured and front-loaded with purpose and link types. Every sentence adds value, covering supported forms, unsupported forms, event_types, PIT-safe, and sibling comparison. Slightly verbose but justified by density of useful information.

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?

Given tool complexity (6 params, output schema not shown but described), the description covers all necessary context: return fields with ordering, supported/enumerated form types, handling of unsupported forms, event_types filtering, and sibling differentiation. Output schema exists, so explanation of return values is a bonus. Fully complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema; it mentions event_types filtering and PIT-safe dates, but these are already implied. 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?

Clearly states verb (Get) and resource (direct links to SEC EDGAR filings for US public companies). Describes four types of deep links per filing, providing precise scope. Differentiates from sibling `verify_fact_lineage` by noting when to use each.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool vs `verify_fact_lineage`. Also advises on unsupported form types, directing to `describe_schema` and raw SDK access. Clear guidance on 8-K item filtering and date filtering behavior.

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 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose with detailed descriptions that clarify differences. Overlaps like get_peer_comparables vs screen_universe are well-differentiated by scope (single company vs cross-sectional). Similarly, get_insider_sentiment vs get_smart_money_flow are clearly distinguished by data sources and methodology.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., create_report, get_financial_ratios, delete_alert). No mixing of conventions or inconsistent verbs.

Tool Count2/5

With 69 tools, the count far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many'. While the domain is broad, the sheer volume likely overwhelms agents and increases selection complexity.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of SEC filings, ratios, smart-money data, alerts, reports, and more. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no options or detailed debt data), but most analyst workflows are supported.

Resources