edgar-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

resolve_company

Find a company's SEC CIK number from a ticker symbol or company name. When a name is ambiguous, returns candidate matches for the user to choose from.

Instructions

Find a company's SEC CIK number from a ticker symbol or a company name.

Call this first, before any other tool. Every other tool needs a CIK.

A ticker symbol resolves exactly and is never a guess. A company name is always a guess, because SEC filer names are not unique: "Apple" matches Apple Inc. and Apple Hospitality REIT, and "Delta" matches several unrelated filers. Prefer a ticker whenever the user gave you one.

When two names score too closely to separate, this tool refuses to choose and returns resolved: false with a candidates list. Do not pick one of the candidates yourself. Ask the user which company they mean, quoting the names and tickers, and then call this tool again with the ticker.

A company that is not in the result is very likely not an SEC filer at all. Private companies (Stripe, SpaceX, OpenAI), foreign companies with no US listing, and subsidiaries that do not file separately are simply absent from EDGAR. If a name does not resolve, say the company does not appear to file with the SEC. Do not answer from memory.

Args: query: A ticker symbol such as "NVDA", or a company name such as "NVIDIA Corporation".

Returns: On a confident match: cik, ticker, name, confidence and match_type ("ticker_exact", "name_exact" or "name_fuzzy"), plus ranked candidates. On an ambiguous match: resolved false, an error, a suggestion, and the ranked candidates to put to the user.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and covers it thoroughly: ticker matches are exact while name matches are guesses, ambiguous matches return resolved:false with candidates, and unresolved names likely mean the company does not file with the SEC. It even warns not to answer from memory.

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 description is front-loaded with purpose and usage, and the behavioral guidance is dense but never padded. The Returns paragraph is somewhat detailed — some of which may be redundant with the existing output schema — but it earns its place by explaining ambiguity handling.

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?

Given a single parameter and a rich behavioral contract, the description covers invocation order, input semantics, ambiguous-match handling, non-filer cases, and return shape. Nothing needed to call the tool correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must define the single query parameter, and it does: a ticker symbol such as 'NVDA' or a company name such as 'NVIDIA Corporation'. It also explains the interpretation of each input form, which the bare schema cannot 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource — 'Find a company's SEC CIK number from a ticker symbol or a company name' — and distinguishes exact ticker resolution from fuzzy name matching. This clearly differentiates the tool from sibling tools that operate on an already-known CIK.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly instructs 'Call this first, before any other tool' and explains why every other tool needs a CIK. It also gives decision rules: prefer a ticker when provided, ask the user when candidates are ambiguous, and do not pick a candidate yourself.

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

Deploy Server