Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
daniel3303

Equibles

by daniel3303
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

Funds Holding a Stock

GetFundsHoldingStock
Read-only

Find which mutual funds and ETFs hold a given stock or ETF using SEC NPORT-P reports, with position size, value, net asset share, and report dates.

Instructions

Get the registered investment companies (mutual funds and ETFs) holding an exact stock or ETF listing, from SEC Form NPORT-P portfolio reports. The listed security's authoritative CUSIP (or, for a listing on another exchange written MIC:TICKER, its ISIN) is matched against the holding rows on each fund series' most recent report (series that stopped filing more than 18 months ago are excluded), so an exited position never shows as current. Returns the fund's registrant and series, the reporting period, the position size, its U.S.-dollar value, its share of the fund's net assets and the payoff profile (Long/Short), largest positions first. Report dates differ per fund series (each files on its own fiscal quarter), so values are as of each row's report date and cross-row totals mix as-of dates.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
offsetNoNumber of matching fund positions to skip before returning rows (default: 0)
tickerYesListed security ticker (e.g., AAPL, VOO); a listing on another exchange is MIC:TICKER (XPAR:AIR).
maxResultsNoMaximum number of fund positions to return, largest first (default: 20, clamped to 1-500)
registrantOrSeriesNoOptional registrant or series name filter (case-insensitive contains, e.g. 'Vanguard') — reaches positions beyond the largest 500

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With only a readOnlyHint annotation, the description carries real behavioral load: it discloses the 18-month stale-series cutoff so exited positions don't read as current, and warns that per-series report dates differ so cross-row totals mix as-of dates. These are non-obvious caveats an agent could not derive from annotations or schema.

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?

Purpose and scope are front-loaded, and every sentence adds a distinct fact (source, matching key, staleness cutoff, returned fields, date-mixing caveat). It is dense and slightly run-on, but there is little wasted text.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description enumerates the returned fields (registrant/series, reporting period, position size, USD value, net-asset share, Long/Short payoff) and the ordering. Nothing an agent needs to call or interpret the result is missing.

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% (baseline 3), but the description adds genuine meaning: ticker resolution is via authoritative CUSIP/ISIN, results are ordered largest-first, and registrantOrSeries is explained as the way to reach positions beyond the largest 500. That last point materially clarifies a parameter the schema only labels generically.

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+resource (funds holding an exact stock/ETF listing) and pins the data source to SEC Form NPORT-P, which cleanly separates it from 13F-based siblings like GetTopHolders or GetMostHeldStocks. An agent knows exactly what population of holders is returned without opening the schema.

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?

Scope is unambiguous (mutual funds/ETFs only, exact CUSIP/ISIN match, stale series excluded), which implicitly routes the agent here vs institutional-holder tools. However, it never explicitly names an alternative tool or a when-not condition, so the routing is inferable rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools