Skip to main content
Glama

Get Insider Activity

get_insider_activity
Read-onlyIdempotent

Parse SEC insider transaction filings to identify genuine open-market trades, flagging Rule 10b5-1 sales and excluding compensation-related events.

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).
Install Server

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful interpretive context about how the data is categorized (discretionary vs. 10b5-1, compensation mechanics), which helps the agent understand the output's significance. It does not mention potential limitations like filing delays or coverage gaps, but with strong annotations this is acceptable.

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 about 100 words across two paragraphs, but every sentence earns its place. The bolded 10b5-1 distinction and the explanation of compensation mechanics are substantive and not filler. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, though it could be tightened slightly.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description effectively communicates the key output dimensions: who traded, when, at what price, and whether the trade is 10b5-1 or a compensation event. This is sufficient for an agent to know what to expect. It does not document pagination or error behavior, but the 'limit' parameter and openWorldHint partially cover that. Given the interpretive complexity, the description is reasonably complete.

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?

All 5 parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no parameter-level details beyond what is in the schema, such as format hints for 'since' or examples for 'person'. It provides no extra semantic value for parameters.

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: 'Parsed SEC Form 4 insider transactions', and immediately enumerates the key data points (who, when, price, and 10b5-1 plan status). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like get_edgar_filings or get_institutional_holdings by emphasizing the insider-trading focus and the plan-classification nuance.

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 description gives clear context for when to use the tool: when interpreting insider sales, particularly to separate pre-scheduled 10b5-1 sales from discretionary ones, as highlighted by 'That distinction is the whole point.' However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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

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