Skip to main content
Glama

get_insider_activity

Parse SEC Form 4 filings to reveal insider trades—who, when, at what price. Distinguish discretionary open-market sales from pre-scheduled 10b5-1 plans and compensation-related transactions.

Instructions

Parsed SEC Form 4 insider transactions — who traded, when, at what price, and crucially whether the sale was made under a Rule 10b5-1 plan.

That distinction is the whole point: a pre-scheduled 10b5-1 sale carries almost no information about an insider's view, while a discretionary open-market sale does. The tool also separates real decisions (codes P/S) from compensation mechanics — option exercises, grants, and shares withheld to pay tax on vesting — which are routinely and wrongly reported as "insiders sold $X".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formsNoWhich ownership forms to read — "4" (changes in ownership, the default), "3" (initial statement filed on becoming an insider — all holdings, no trades), "5" (annual statement of exempt or deferred transactions), or "3,4,5". Use "144" for notices of *proposed* sales, which are filed before the trade and so lead the Form 4 that later reports it.4
limitNoHow many Form 4 filings to parse (default 10).
sinceNoISO date (YYYY-MM-DD); drop transactions before it.
personNoFilter to one insider by name, case- and accent-insensitive (e.g. "Mehrotra").
symbolYesTicker symbol (e.g. MU, AAPL).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses key behavior: separating 10b5-1 sales from discretionary ones and filtering out compensation mechanics, which is valuable context beyond a simple 'get data' statement. However, it omits any limitations, auth requirements, or error behavior.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose, then expands on the key distinction in a focused second paragraph. Every sentence contributes semantic value, though it could be slightly tightened without losing nuance.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's 5 params, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description provides strong context about the tool's analytical purpose and the meaning of its output. It doesn't cover edge cases or prerequisites, but the core use case is well articulated.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, though it provides surrounding context about Form 4 semantics that indirectly clarifies the 'forms' parameter.

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 clearly states the tool parses SEC Form 4 insider transactions and highlights the crucial 10b5-1 distinction, giving a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the direct sibling get_insider_trades, which creates potential ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit when-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies analytical use cases (e.g., distinguishing discretionary sales from compensation) but never states when this tool is preferable to alternatives like get_insider_trades, get_sec_filings, or read_filing, especially given the overlapping sibling name.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Blahaj-gif/Finance-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server