Skip to main content
Glama

search_fund_events

Read-onlyIdempotent

Cross-reference a fund's stock holdings with structured A-share events. Returns impact-score sorted event feed for portfolio risk monitoring and due diligence.

Instructions

Search fund penetration events — cross-reference a fund's underlying stock holdings with AStockEvent structured events. Returns a weighted event feed sorted by impact_score = weight_pct × severity_weight. Covers all 13 A-share event types: share_reduction, delisting_risk, regulatory_letter, lockup_expiration, share_buyback, asset_restructuring, trading_halt_resume, pledge_risk, earnings_forecast, share_increase, dividend, violation_penalty, cb_event. Use when: you have a fund code and want to know what events happened to its underlying holdings — e.g. monitoring FOF portfolio risk, fund due diligence, or checking 'did my fund's heavy-weight stocks have any regulatory issues recently?'. Each event includes: stock_code, stock_name, weight_pct, event_type, event_summary, impact_score, severity_weight, confidence_tier. The response includes fund_info, holdings list, events sorted by impact_score DESC, a summary with total_events/affected_holdings_count/affected_weight_pct/top_risk, and a data_freshness disclaimer noting holdings are from the latest quarterly report. Free tier: Top 10 holdings only. Paid REST tier: full holdings + extended lookback.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fund_codeYes6-digit fund code. Example: '000001' for 华夏成长混合.
event_typesNoComma-separated event types to filter. Empty = all 13 types.
daysNoNumber of days to look back for events. Default: 30, Max: 90.
min_weightNoMinimum holding weight_pct to include (e.g. 5.0 = only stocks with ≥5% weight). Default: 0 (all holdings).
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description additonally discloses important behavioral traits: data freshness from latest quarterly report, free tier limits (top 10 holdings), paid tier full holdings, and ordering by impact_score. No contradictions.

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 the core purpose and each sentence adds value. It is relatively long but well-structured. Minor redundancy could be trimmed, but overall it is effective and earns its length.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the output structure, data freshness, tier limits, and sorting. It lacks error handling details, but the essential context for an agent to use the tool is provided.

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 significant new meaning for parameters beyond the schema, though it provides context like free tier limits which relate to the fund_code parameter indirectly. Overall, minimal added value over schema.

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 clearly states the tool searches fund penetration events by cross-referencing holdings with stock events, specifying the output as a weighted event feed sorted by impact_score. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on fund-level event aggregation, which is unique among the listed search tools.

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 explicitly provides use cases (e.g., monitoring FOF portfolio risk, fund due diligence) and conditions (have a fund code). However, it does not mention when NOT to use it or contrast with alternatives like search_events_by_stock, though the context is clear.

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/NengjiangLunpi/astockevent-mcp'

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