Finviz + SEC EDGAR MCP Server

get_filing_text

Fetch targeted narrative sections (e.g., Item 7 MD&A, Item 1A Risk Factors) from the latest 10-K, 10-Q, or 20-F filing. Specify ticker and sections to get direct text without iXBRL clutter.

Instructions

Fetch specific narrative sections from the most recent SEC filing. For 10-K and 10-Q filings, uses edgartools' structured TenK/TenQ objects to pull named items directly — no iXBRL overhead, no wasted character budget on table-of-contents boilerplate. For 20-F filings, uses edgartools markdown extraction from the primary filing HTML and slices by 20-F item headings. For other form types (8-K, etc.), falls back to full-text extraction.

Args: ticker: Stock ticker symbol. form_type: Form to fetch — "10-K", "10-Q", "8-K", etc. sections: Comma-separated list of items to retrieve. Default "Item 7,Item 1A" returns MD&A + Risk Factors for 10-K / 10-Q. For 20-F, useful sections include: "Item 3.D", "Item 4", "Item 5", "Item 18", plus aliases like "risk_factors", "business", "mda", "financial_statements". Supported formats: Full: "Item 1", "Item 1A", "Item 7", "Item 7A", "Item 8" Short: "1", "1A", "7", "7A" Aliases: "mda", "risk_factors", "business" Pass sections="" to get Item 7 + Item 1A (same as default). Use get_sec_filings first to confirm available items. max_chars_per_section: Max characters per section (default 8000). Each section is truncated independently.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`ticker`	Yes
`sections`	No	Item 7,Item 1A
`form_type`	No	10-K
`max_chars_per_section`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0Sep 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses extraction mechanisms (structured TenK/TenQ objects, markdown slicing for 20-F, full-text fallback), confirms no iXBRL overhead, and explains per-section truncation behavior. It does not mention error conditions or rate limits, but the disclosure is strong.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than average but densely packed with necessary detail, organized from purpose to form-type behavior to parameter documentation. Every sentence earns its place, and the key purpose is front-loaded.

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?

The tool is complex due to multiple form types and section-format variations, but the description covers all relevant scenarios, defaults, aliases, and the prerequisite flow. With an output schema present, the lack of explicit return-value documentation is acceptable.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates by documenting all four parameters in detail. It explains sections formats, aliases, defaults, the meaning of empty strings, and per-parameter truncation. This is far beyond the bare 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 states a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('specific narrative sections from the most recent SEC filing'), and immediately differentiates behavior across 10-K/10-Q, 20-F, and other form types. This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from siblings like get_sec_filings and get_stock_fundamentals.

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 across form types and provides an explicit prerequisite: 'Use get_sec_filings first to confirm available items.' It does not fully enumerate alternatives or say when not to use this tool, but the usage context is strong.

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