FilingDelta

Insider trades around the 10-Q card (paid $0.05)

get_window

Read-onlyIdempotent

Paid $0.05 USDC on Base. Call when you need what a company's officers and directors bought or sold (SEC Form 4 and 4/A) in the 30 days either side of its latest 10-Q: each trade graded high, medium or low by the FilingDelta rubric (not SEC grading), with figures and EDGAR citations. Free sample over HTTP: /sample/window/{ticker}. Tickers: NVDA, AMD, INTC. Others return 404 (no charge).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ticker": "<ticker>"
    },
    "name": "get_window"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ticker`	Yes	Ticker

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`period`	No
`ticker`	Yes
`changes`	Yes
`company`	No
`accession`	No
`period_end`	No
`source_url`	Yes
`filing_date`	No
`filing_type`	Yes
`generated_at`	No
`comparison_basis`	No
`high_materiality_count`	No
`new_material_items_count`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world; the description adds cost ($0.05 USDC on Base), the no-charge 404 behavior for unsupported tickers, the data source, EDGAR citations, and a caveat that grades come from the FilingDelta rubric rather than the SEC. That is material behavior an agent could not infer from annotations.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: price first, then the call condition, then scope and caveats, then sample and coverage limits. Every clause carries information, though the single run-on sentence is slightly crowded.

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 return values need no explanation. Cost, coverage limits, failure behavior, grading caveat and a free-sample path are all present, which is everything an agent needs before paying to call it.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single enum parameter is fully documented, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning by stating that out-of-enum tickers return 404 with no charge, which is operational semantics the schema does not convey.

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 and resource ('what a company's officers and directors bought or sold, SEC Form 4 and 4/A') plus the exact scope (30 days either side of the latest 10-Q). The grading rubric mention and the windowed framing make it distinguishable from other insider-data siblings.

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?

Explicit trigger: 'Call when you need ...'. It also routes price-sensitive users to a free HTTP sample and states coverage limits (only NVDA, AMD, INTC). It stops short of naming a sibling as the alternative for other insider queries, but the when-to-use condition is clear.

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

All FilingDelta 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?