Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

InsiderRadar

by nl.insiderradar
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Summarize insider activity for one company or one insider (SEC Form 4)

summarize_issuer_insiders
Read-onlyIdempotent

Summarize the Form 4 filings of one company (ticker or name) or one insider over a period, from 2020 to today: how many filings, lines and insiders; open-market purchases and sales (count, shares, USD value, and how much of it was under a Rule 10b5-1 plan); every transaction type; the most active insiders; and the largest filings with their source_url. Default period: the last 365 days.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "summarize_issuer_insiders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoLast filing date, as YYYY-MM-DD (included).
daysNoLook back this many days from today. Default 365. Leave out when you give from.
fromNoFirst filing date, as YYYY-MM-DD (included).
issuerNoPart of the issuer's company name, e.g. Nvidia. Use ticker when you know it.
tickerNoThe issuer's exchange ticker, e.g. NVDA (case does not matter). Matched on the company's SEC identifier (CIK), so filings made under an earlier ticker are included (META also finds the FB years).
insiderNoPart of the reporting person's name as filed, e.g. Huang. SEC filings usually write the last name first (HUANG JEN HSUN).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this to be a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real behavioral context beyond them: the data window is bounded at 2020 through today, and the period defaults to the last 365 days when unspecified, which matters for interpreting results. It says nothing about result caps, pagination, or latency, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

The scope, alternatives for identifying the subject, and the default period are front-loaded in a single dense but well-ordered sentence, and the enumeration of output contents is a useful roadmap. It is slightly over-packed with listed sub-metrics, but essentially no sentence is wasted.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing return values, and it does so thoroughly (counts, purchase/sale breakdowns with shares and USD, 10b5-1 share, transaction types, most active insiders, largest filings with source_url). The main omission is filter-precedence behavior when combining issuer, ticker, and insider inputs, which is the one thing an agent could still get wrong.

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 fully documented, and the description correctly establishes the baseline: issuer or insider targeting plus a time period. It adds only light semantics, e.g. that the subject is 'one company ... or one insider', but is silent on what happens if both an issuer filter and an insider filter are supplied, and does not reinforce the from/days/to interaction beyond what the schema states.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description pairs a specific verb ('Summarize') with a specific resource ('Form 4 filings of one company or one insider') and enumerates exactly what the summary contains, so the agent knows precisely what output to expect. It does not name or differentiate itself from the closely related siblings (search_insider_transactions, top_insider_activity), which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Usage context is implied by 'of one company (ticker or name) or one insider over a period', and the 2020-to-today coverage plus the 365-day default give the agent framing for when this tool is the right fit. There is no explicit when-not guidance and no mention of when to prefer the sibling search or ranking tools instead.

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

All InsiderRadar 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