Search for SEC filings by company or entity name using the FMP SEC Filings By Name API. Quickly retrieve official filings for any organization based on its name.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| company | Yes | Company name or partial name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'quickly retrieve official filings' but does not disclose expected response format, pagination, potential limitations, or any side effects. For a search tool, this is minimal behavioral disclosure beyond the basic function.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is short and front-loaded with the key action and resource. However, the second sentence largely repeats the first ('retrieve official filings' vs 'search for SEC filings'), introducing minor redundancy without additional value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema and only one parameter, so the description is relatively complete for the input side. However, it does not specify what the returned filings look like (e.g., metadata list, filing content), which is left ambiguous for an agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema fully describes the single 'company' parameter (name or partial name), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, which is the baseline for this score.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states a specific action ('Search for SEC filings') and resource ('by company or entity name'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like searchCompaniesByCIK and searchCompaniesBySymbol. It also explicitly mentions the underlying API source, making the intent unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the use case: when you have a company or entity name and need SEC filings. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the 'by name' framing provides clear context relative to other search tools that use CIK or symbol.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.