Govparse Government Data Gateway

sec_insiders_transactions

What did a company's insiders actually file? Search individual SEC Form 4 transaction lines by ticker, issuer CIK, insider name, direction (buy/sell/other), transaction code (P/S/A/M/F/G), role (officer/director/ten_percent), state, security type, minimum value, or date. Returns the insider, role, security, code, shares, price, and value per filing — the raw feed behind the cluster signal. Public SEC filings as filed — observational, not advice. [price: $0.05/row]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`role`	No	Insider role: officer \| director \| ten_percent.
`sort`	No	txn_date \| txn_value \| shares \| filing_date :asc\|:desc. Default txn_date:desc.
`limit`	No	Max rows (default 25, cap 100).
`owner`	No	Reporting-insider name fragment.
`since`	No	Transaction on/after this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`state`	No	Insider state code(s), CSV.
`offset`	No	Rows to skip, for paging.
`ticker`	No	Issuer ticker(s), CSV (as filed on the Form 4).
`txn_code`	No	SEC transaction code(s), CSV: P (buy), S (sell), A (grant), M, F, G...
`direction`	No	buy \| sell \| other (grants, option exercises, tax withholding...).
`min_value`	No	Minimum transaction value in $ (shares × price).
`issuer_cik`	No	SEC issuer CIK.
`security_type`	No	nonderiv (common shares) \| deriv (options/warrants).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

AddedJul 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses that it returns specific fields (insider, role, etc.) and states that data is from public SEC filings. However, it lacks information on authentication, rate limits, data freshness, or side effects. The warning 'observational, not advice' is helpful but does not cover all behavioral aspects.

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 very concise, with only three sentences and a pricing note. It is front-loaded with an engaging question, efficiently lists filter criteria, and ends with return fields and a disclaimer. No redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 13 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main return fields (insider, role, shares, etc.) and notes pricing. It lacks details on CSV parameter handling or pagination behavior, but the schema handles defaults. The connection to the cluster signal is mentioned, which aids context.

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%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description lists filter types (ticker, direction, etc.) in a narrative form but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema descriptions. It provides context with examples of transaction codes and direction values.

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 an engaging question and clearly identifies the tool's purpose: searching individual SEC Form 4 transaction lines with many filter options. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'sec_insiders_clusters' by calling itself 'the raw feed behind the cluster signal.'

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 for detailed insider transactions versus aggregated clusters, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide non-usage guidance. No direct comparison to other sibling tools is made.

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

All Govparse Government Data Gateway tools Inspect

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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct domain and specific action (e.g., FDA approvals vs clearances vs recalls; firmstanding business360 dossier vs search vs screen). Even overlapping concepts like 'business360' vs 'business360_lookup' are distinguished by input (UUID vs name+state). No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use a consistent lowercase snake_case pattern with domain prefix (e.g., fda_*, firmstanding_*, fmcsa_*, govcon_*). Action words (search, lookup, screen, feed, stats) follow predictable usage. The naming is uniform and easy to parse.

Tool Count4/5

38 tools is on the higher end but appropriate for a comprehensive government data gateway spanning multiple agencies and datasets. Each domain has a reasonable number of tools (e.g., FMCSA: 7, OFLC: 6). Could potentially be trimmed slightly, but overall well-scoped for the stated purpose.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the major government data sources comprehensively: FDA (approvals, clearances, recalls), FMCSA (carrier census, safety, insurance, etc.), FSIS, DOJ/OFLC, OSHA/EPA/DOL enforcement, SEC insider filings, clinical trials, VA facilities/opportunities/vendors, and federal contracting. No obvious gaps for the stated gateway purpose.

Resources

Need Help?