Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
daniel3303

Equibles

by daniel3303
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

Top Institutional Holders

GetTopHolders
Read-only

Retrieve top institutional holders of a stock or ETF from SEC 13F filings, ranked by shares held with position value and institutional ownership percentage.

Instructions

Get the top institutional holders (fund managers) of an exact stock or ETF listing from SEC 13F-HR filings. Returns a ranked list by shares held, including published position value and percentage of total institutional 13F shares (not of shares outstanding). Values normally use report-date closing prices, may fall back to filer values, and can be zero when unavailable. During the newest quarter's filing window, non-ETF primary stocks carry non-filers' prior-quarter positions; ETF listings remain exact and as-filed because carry-forward is filer-wide. Use position type before treating put/call rows as ownership. Each holder shows its entity type from regulatory records (Form ADV, SEC filer profile, 13D/13G, N-CEN), filtered by holderTypes, and its style band measured from its filed book, filtered by styles.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
offsetNoNumber of ranked holding rows to skip before returning results (default: 0)
stylesNoStyle bands to keep, as an array of tokens: idx (index-like), sys (systematic-like), conc (concentrated), divact (diversified active), unk (book too small or unvalued to band), e.g. ["conc"]. Bands are measured from each holder's filed 13F book in the newest measured quarter on or before the report date; a holder not measured that quarter is left out by any style filter. Omit for all.
tickerYesListed security ticker (e.g., AAPL, VOO)
maxResultsNoMaximum number of holding rows to return (default: 20, clamped to 1-500)
reportDateNoQuarter-end 13F report date in YYYY-MM-DD format, e.g. 2026-03-31 (defaults to the latest available; an off-quarter date snaps to the nearest report on or before it)
holderTypesNoHolder types to keep, as an array of tokens: adv (registered investment adviser), era (exempt reporting adviser), ia (other adviser), bank, ins (insurer), bd (broker-dealer), fund (registered fund), plan (benefit plan), nonus (non-US institution), unk (no deciding record yet), e.g. ["bank", "ins"]. Types come from Form ADV, SEC filer profiles, 13D/13G and N-CEN, never from names. Omit for all.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only assert readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries the interpretive burden and does so richly: price-source fallbacks, zero-value cases, prior-quarter carry-forward behavior during filing windows and its ETF exception, and the warning that the percentage is of total institutional 13F shares, not shares outstanding. These are non-obvious traits an agent could not infer from structured fields.

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 return format are front-loaded, with caveats following. The prose is dense and some sentences carry several clauses, but each sentence adds a distinct operational caveat rather than filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates what a row contains (rank, shares, position value, percentage basis, entity type, style band). Combined with the carry-forward and put/call caveats it is nearly complete, though the pagination interaction between offset and maxResults is left to the schema.

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 all six parameters including styles and holderTypes tokens are already documented in the schema. The description restates the existence of the holderTypes and styles filters without adding token syntax or default behavior beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 precise verb+resource scope: top institutional holders of an exact stock or ETF listing sourced from SEC 13F-HR filings. This clearly separates it from sibling tools that traverse the other direction (GetInstitutionPortfolio, GetInstitutionConsensusHoldings) or aggregate across stocks (GetMostHeldStocks, GetHolderMix).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description offers interpretation guidance ('Use position type before treating put/call rows as ownership') and explains the filing-window nuance, but never explicitly states when to choose this tool over alternatives such as GetHolderMix or GetTopInstitutionalBuyersSellers. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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