minia2a-mcp-remote

x402-insider-alert

Insider Alert: Latest SEC Form 4 insider filings for a US ticker: resolves the CIK, then returns up to 10 filings with dates, accession numbers and document links.

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": "x402-insider-alert"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`input`	No
`symbol`	No
`ticker`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 16, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / input / description
```
Removed value: -"Input to process"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / symbol / description
```
Removed value: -"Symbol to process"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / ticker / description
```
Removed value: -"Ticker to process"
```
First observedOct 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose useful traits: an internal CIK resolution step, a fixed 10-filing ceiling, and the returned fields, which implies a read-only operation. It says nothing about what happens on an unresolvable ticker, whether the result is free or billed, or caching/freshness, which leaves real gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the resource and the return shape with no filler. The leading 'Insider Alert:' label restates the tool name and could be dropped, but nothing else is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The return value is adequately described in lieu of an output schema, but the tool has three undocumented, non-required parameters at 0% coverage and the description resolves none of the ambiguity. For a tool where an agent could easily pass the wrong field name, this leaves the definition incomplete for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the three parameters ('input', 'symbol', 'ticker') look redundant, so the description is the only place an agent could learn which one to supply. The description mentions 'a US ticker' but never clarifies whether 'input', 'symbol' or 'ticker' is the intended field, nor what format (symbol vs. CIK) is expected, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 gives a specific resource (SEC Form 4 insider filings) and a specific operation (resolve CIK, return up to 10 recent filings with dates, accession numbers and document links). It is far clearer than a name-only tool, though it does not contrast itself with any alternative, which is partly excused here since the listed siblings are unrelated utilities.

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?

Scope is implied by 'for a US ticker' and 'latest ... up to 10 filings', which tells the agent this is a recent-filings lookup with a hard cap and a US-jurisdiction restriction. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement that historical or paginated lookups are out of scope, and no naming of an alternative for those needs.

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

All minia2a-mcp-remote 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.