SEC Filings

Compare with the preceding filing

compare_filing

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when someone asks what changed between a filing and the one before it, such as this year's 10-K against last year's. Compares the filing with the preceding available reporting period of the same company and form. Returns full sentence-change counts and bounded examples for up to eight sections, and reports when no prior filing is available. It is a sampled comparison, not a complete redline.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`filing_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`form`	No
`error`	No
`prior`	No
`usage`	No
`reason`	No
`status`	Yes
`ticker`	No
`totals`	No
`api_url`	No
`company`	No
`current`	No
`message`	No
`counting`	No
`docs_url`	Yes
`sections`	No
`furniture`	No
`comparable`	No
`reportDate`	No
`http_status`	No
`retry_after`	No
`samples_only`	No
`total_sections`	No
`diffRulesVersion`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 7, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / counting
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / diffRulesVersion
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / furniture

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "added": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "changed": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "removed": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "unchanged": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "added",
+    "removed",
+    "changed",
+    "unchanged"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / sections / items / properties / furniture

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "counts": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "added": {
+          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+          "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "changed": {
+          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+          "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "removed": {
+          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+          "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "unchanged": {
+          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+          "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "added",
+        "removed",
+        "changed",
+        "unchanged"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "counts"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds substantial behavioral context the annotations don't: 'sampled comparison, not a complete redline', the output shape ('full sentence-change counts and bounded examples for up to eight sections'), and the empty case ('reports when no prior filing is available'). This is genuinely non-obvious behavior that an agent needs before deciding to rely on the output.

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?

Three tight sentences: trigger, behavior, and caveat. The usage trigger is front-loaded, and every sentence adds information without repetition.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description needn't detail return values, yet it still summarizes the return ('sentence-change counts and bounded examples for up to eight sections'). Combined with the no-prior-filing case and the sampling caveat, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret the tool.

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?

Only one parameter, filing_id, and the schema gives no description (coverage 0%). The description names the concept of a filing and its comparison target but doesn't explain the ID format (^\d{1,10}-\d{18}$) or that the preceding filing is resolved automatically. With one param and no schema text, the description provides minimal but acceptable 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 (compare) and resource (filing vs preceding filing), with a concrete example (this year's 10-K against last year's). It also scopes the comparison to the same company and form, which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like filing_facts or read_filing_section.

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?

The opening clause gives a clear when-to-use trigger ('Use when someone asks what changed...'). It does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name sibling alternatives, so it falls just short of the top score.

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

All SEC Filings 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?