Skip to main content
Glama

fundz

by net.fundz
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search fund formations

search_fund_formations
Read-onlyIdempotent

New investment funds raising capital, from SEC Form D filings: fund name, target or raised amount and the filing. Use this for "who is raising a fund", LP and allocator work, or to catch a firm standing up a new vehicle before it is announced.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number, starting at 1 (default 1). Each page holds `limit` results; the reply ends with the total and next_page when there are more.
limitNoResults per page (default 20, max 50)
min_amountNoMinimum amount in dollars, e.g. 50000000 for $50M
company_nameNoFund or firm name (partial, case-insensitive)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Maximum results (default 20, max 50)"New value: +"Results per page (default 20, max 50)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / page
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Page number, starting at 1 (default 1). Each page holds `limit` results; the reply ends with the total and next_page when there are more.",
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), so the description only needs to add context. It does: results are derived from SEC Form D filings and can surface vehicles before they are publicly announced, which tells the agent about coverage, provenance and timeliness. Rate limits and result volume are not addressed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with what the data is and where it comes from, followed by the use cases. No filler or repetition of schema content.

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 no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields (fund name, target/raised amount, the filing) and the data source. Pagination behavior is left to the schema, and it does not state coverage caveats such as reporting lag, but an agent has enough to call and interpret 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 all four parameters (page, limit, min_amount, company_name) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 names a specific verb and resource (new investment funds raising capital) and pins the source of truth (SEC Form D filings), plus the fields returned (fund name, target/raised amount, the filing). This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like search_funding_rounds (company rounds) and search_sec_filings (raw filings).

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?

It gives concrete use cases — "who is raising a fund", LP and allocator work, catching a firm standing up a new vehicle pre-announcement — which is real when-to-use guidance. It does not name an alternative tool or state when not to use this one, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All fundz 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