Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

FinancialMD

by md.financial
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Insider holdings

insider_holders
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return what each director and officer owned after their latest reported transaction (shares_owned_after on Forms 4 and 5), per security and direct or indirect ownership, largest first: the later of the balance after their latest transaction and their latest holding line (a Form 3 initial statement, or a Form 4 or 5 holdings table); source says which. Say "as last reported" with the date. Filing-layer read: served with generous limits on every tier. Use it when asked how much a company's directors and officers own. If a dataset, field, company or analysis you need is missing, call request_data.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "company": "ticker:AAPL"
    },
    "name": "insider_holders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
as_ofNoKnowledge date or timestamp (YYYY-MM-DD or RFC 3339). The answer is what FinancialMD knew at that instant: only facts whose known interval contains as_of. Omit for the current view.
limitNoMaximum number of periods or items to return (default 25, at most 500).
companyYesCompany identifier: a FinancialMD id ("fmd_01H..."), an SEC CIK ("cik:320193"), or a ticker ("ticker:AAPL", optionally with the MIC "ticker:AAPL.XNAS"). A bare ticker like "AAPL" is accepted and sent as ticker:AAPL. An issuer on an EU or UK regulated market that does not file with the SEC has no CIK: pass its LEI ("lei:IOG4E947OATN0KJYSD45") or its fmd_ id.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo{ items: [{ owner, relationship, officer_title, security_title, ownership_nature, as_of_date, shares }], note }
metaNoRequest metadata: request_id, as_of, company resolution, coverage, pipeline_version, licence, terms, proof_base.
errorNoPresent only on isError results: the API error code and message plus remedy hints.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / company / description
      Previous value: -"Company identifier: a FinancialMD id (\"fmd_01H...\"), an SEC CIK (\"cik:320193\"), or a ticker (\"ticker:AAPL\", optionally with the MIC \"ticker:AAPL.XNAS\"). A bare ticker like \"AAPL\" is accepted and sent as ticker:AAPL."New value: +"Company identifier: a FinancialMD id (\"fmd_01H...\"), an SEC CIK (\"cik:320193\"), or a ticker (\"ticker:AAPL\", optionally with the MIC \"ticker:AAPL.XNAS\"). A bare ticker like \"AAPL\" is accepted and sent as ticker:AAPL. An issuer on an EU or UK regulated market that does not file with the SEC has no CIK: pass its LEI (\"lei:IOG4E947OATN0KJYSD45\") or its fmd_ id."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the description adds real extra context: a filing-layer read "served with generous limits on every tier," source attribution ("source says which"), and the required recency caveat ("as last reported" with the date). The one gap is that it does not say what happens when no Form 3/4/5 exists for a person.

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?

Front-loaded with the core verb and resource, and every sentence carries content (definition, source, limits, use case, fallback). The parenthetical clause defining which holding line wins is dense and slightly hard to parse on first read, costing a point.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return shape, and it still covers provenance, recency framing, and access limits. The remaining ambiguity is behavioral edge cases (people with no holdings filings, delisted/foreign issuers) rather than anything an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so company, as_of, and limit are already well documented with formats and examples. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema; the "largest first" ordering is output behavior, not parameter guidance.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (return insider holdings: shares_owned_after per security and direct/indirect ownership) plus the ordering (largest first) and the source basis (Forms 3/4/5). That is enough for an agent to separate it from insider_transactions, which reports transactions rather than balances.

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?

"Use it when asked how much a company's directors and officers own" gives a clear triggering context, and the closing sentence routes missing-data cases to request_data. It stops short of an explicit when-not or a direct comparison with insider_transactions, so it is strong but not fully exhaustive.

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

All FinancialMD toolsInspect
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