Kaleidoscope MCP (SEC & financial data)

13F Manager Track Record (replication return vs S&P)

thirteenf_manager_performance

Read-onlyIdempotent

Track record of a 13F manager over time — the value-weighted return of their disclosed long book vs the S&P (SPY), per quarter, with trailing 1-year and 2-year figures, excess-over-SPY, and hit rate. Use to rank/weight managers by skill or to contextualize a fund's moves ('have they actually been good?'). Resolve names with thirteenf_search_managers. IMPORTANT: this is a disclosed-long-book REPLICATION PROXY (a '13F clone'), NOT audited fund returns — excludes shorts/derivatives/fees/cash; always present it as such and check priced_coverage_pct. Returns are decimals (0.12 = 12%).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "cik": "<cik>"
    },
    "name": "thirteenf_manager_performance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cik`	Yes	Manager CIK (e.g. 1067983 = Berkshire). Resolve names with thirteenf_search_managers.
`as_of`	No	Point-in-time date (YYYY-MM-DD). Default: today. Returns rows with `report_date <= as_of`, most recent first. Rows are PIT-per-quarter by construction (trailing_2y for (cik, quarter) uses only prices through that quarter) — no recomputation needed, just the row filter. Echoes as_of_effective.
`quarters`	No	How many quarters of history to return, most recent first (default: 8, max: 40).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent safety, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: this is a replication proxy, not audited returns, excludes shorts/derivatives/fees/cash, and the caller should check priced_coverage_pct. It also documents return encoding (0.12 = 12%), which is exactly the kind of behavioral detail an agent needs before quoting figures.

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?

Purpose and use cases are front-loaded, then the critical caveat, then the unit note — a sensible ordering with little waste. It is on the dense side, but each sentence (proxy caveat, priced_coverage_pct, decimal encoding) carries actionable content.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does it: it names the metrics returned (quarterly replication return, trailing 1y/2y, excess over SPY, hit rate, priced_coverage_pct). Combined with the proxy warning, an agent can call and present results correctly without further 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 cik, as_of and quarters are already fully documented, including PIT semantics and the as_of_effective echo. The description adds no per-parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific resource and computation: value-weighted return of a 13F manager's disclosed long book vs SPY, per quarter, with trailing 1y/2y, excess and hit rate. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling holdings/portfolio tools, which return positions rather than performance.

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?

Gives two concrete use cases (rank/weight managers by skill; contextualize a fund's moves) and routes name resolution to thirteenf_search_managers. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it (e.g., when audited fund returns are wanted), though the replication-proxy caveat partly covers that implicitly.

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

All Kaleidoscope MCP (SEC & financial 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.

Resources

Need Help?