Skip to main content
Glama

Valuein — SEC EDGAR Fundamentals & Smart-Money Data

Mark Inbox Item Read

mark_inbox_read
Idempotent

Set read_at on a single inbox item by its id (from list_signal_inbox or the signals feed resource) — not a signal id. Idempotent — re-marking does NOT reset the first-read timestamp; there is no unmark. Returns the new unread_count so the agent/UI can update its badge without a follow-up call. Tier: sp500+ (sample rejected).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inbox_idYesIdentifier of the inbox item to mark read, as returned by list_signal_inbox or the signals feed resource.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_metaYesProvenance envelope — data lineage for every MCP response
inbox_idYes
marked_readYes
unread_countYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • 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."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / inbox_id / description
      Previous value: -"Identifier of the inbox item to mark read, as returned by list_alert_inbox or the alerts feed resource."New value: +"Identifier of the inbox item to mark read, as returned by list_signal_inbox or the signals feed resource."
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • 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"
      +}
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • 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"
      +}
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • 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"
  6. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / inbox_id / description
      Added value: +"Identifier of the inbox item to mark read, as returned by list_alert_inbox or the alerts feed resource."
  7. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description explains the exact idempotency semantics: re-marking does NOT reset the first-read timestamp and there is no unmark. It also discloses the return value (new unread_count), which helps the agent avoid a follow-up call, and states the tier restriction with 'sp500+ (sample rejected)'. This adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond idempotentHint=true.

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 description is tightly packed: operation, ID source, idempotency caveat, return value, and access tier are all conveyed in three sentences with no filler. The key disambiguation 'not a signal id' appears early, and the rest of the text flows logically.

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 is fully sufficient. It covers the input source, behavior, reversibility, return value, and access restriction. The only optional addition would be naming dismiss_inbox_item as an alternative, but that is not required for correct invocation here.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameter schema already documents inbox_id. The description adds important clarification that the id must come from list_signal_inbox or the signals feed resource and must not be a signal id. This goes beyond the schema's phrasing and helps prevent a likely identifier confusion.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Set read_at on a single inbox item by its id'. It also disambiguates the identifier type with 'not a signal id', which is valuable because sibling tools like list_signal_inbox and dismiss_inbox_item exist. This makes the tool's purpose immediately identifiable.

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 context: use it for marking a single inbox item read, with an id sourced from list_signal_inbox or the signals feed resource. It also provides important when-not guidance like 'not a signal id' and 'there is no unmark', plus an access tier constraint. It does not explicitly contrast with dismiss_inbox_item, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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.