Skip to main content
Glama

Valuein — SEC EDGAR Fundamentals & Smart-Money Data

by io.github.valuein

Verify Fact Lineage

verify_fact_lineage
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this tool when the user asks BOTH what a financial figure is AND which filing reported it — e.g. "What was Apple's most recently reported revenue, and which 10-Q filed it?" or "Show me the accession ID for Tesla's latest net income." Returns a single fact plus its complete filing provenance: entity, concept, period, value, accession ID, filing URL, and form type (10-K, 10-Q, etc.).

Use this INSTEAD OF search_companies when the user already names a company and wants a financial figure with its source filing — search_companies only resolves identifiers and returns no financial data. Use this INSTEAD OF get_company_fundamentals when the user explicitly wants the filing/form type or the accession ID — get_company_fundamentals returns metrics across periods but omits filing provenance.

Two lookup modes: (1) by fact_id (deterministic SHA-256 identity) or (2) by concept name plus a ticker (most recently reported fact). Optionally pin a point-in-time cutoff via as_of_date (YYYY-MM-DD) — returns the latest filing accepted by SEC on or before that date (no look-ahead); check _meta.pit_safe.

DURATION: a single 10-K tags BOTH a 12-month figure and a 3-month Q4 stub at the same period_end; on a tie this returns the longer (headline) window, and every result carries period_type and period_span_days so a 3-month stub is never mistaken for the annual figure.

Provide either fact_id or concept (required). Returns FACT_NOT_FOUND if no matching fact exists. Available on all plans.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tickerYesStock ticker symbol, e.g. AAPL, MSFT, BRK.B
conceptNoStandard concept to look up the most recently known fact for (see the enum for the full fundamentals + capital-allocation set). Use this when you don't have a fact_id. Provide either concept OR fact_id.
fact_idNoDeterministic fact identity hash: SHA-256(entity_id|accession_id|concept|period_end|unit). 64-char lowercase hex. Use this when you already have the hash from a previous query. Provide either fact_id OR concept (not both required, but at least one must be set).
as_of_dateNoPoint-in-time cutoff (YYYY-MM-DD) used with `concept` — returns the latest fact whose 10-K/10-Q was accepted by SEC on or before this date (true PIT, no lookahead; any calendar date works). Canonical name across the suite; supersedes the legacy `period_end`.
period_endNo[DEPRECATED — pass `as_of_date` instead.] Filing-acceptance cutoff (YYYY-MM-DD) used with `concept`; despite the name it filters on filing accepted_at, not the returned fact's period_end. Kept one release for back-compat.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_metaYesProvenance envelope — data lineage for every MCP response
lineageNoFull provenance: fact_id, concept, value, unit, period_end, source accession, SEC EDGAR URL, form_type, accepted_at, plus duration context — period_start, period_span_days, and period_type (instant | quarterly | half_year | nine_month | annual | duration) so a 3-month stub is never mistaken for the 12-month figure.
verifiedYesTrue when the fact was located and its provenance resolved
lookup_byYesHow the fact was located: 'fact_id' or 'concept'

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. Description adds important behavioral context beyond annotations: tie-breaking logic for 10-K (returns longer window with period_type and period_span_days), point-in-time safety via `_meta.pit_safe`, and the behavior of `as_of_date`. 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is well-structured and concise despite its length. It front-loads the core purpose, then contrasts with siblings, then explains modes and edge cases. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's complexity (5 parameters, 1 required, enum, point-in-time cutoff, output schema exists), the description covers all necessary aspects: inputs, lookup modes, tie-breaking, return values (filing provenance). Output schema exists, so return values don't need elaboration.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for each parameter. Description adds further meaning: explains the relationship between `concept` and `fact_id`, clarifies that `as_of_date` filters on filing accepted_at (not period_end), and deprecates `period_end` with a note. Provides context beyond schema.

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 uses specific verbs and resources: 'verify fact lineage' and 'returns a single fact plus its complete filing provenance'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings by naming them explicitly and stating what they lack. Gives concrete examples of user queries that trigger this tool.

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 instead of `search_companies` and `get_company_fundamentals`, with clear differences. Also explains the two lookup modes and the optional `as_of_date` parameter, providing clear guidance on when to use each.

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