mcp-funding-investor-record
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| APIFY_TOKEN | Yes | Your Apify API token. Get it at https://console.apify.com/account/integrations |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_company_funding_recordA | Return a company's funding record from PRIMARY sources: SEC EDGAR Form D filings, UK Companies House registrations and press coverage. Returns one flat Clay ready row in which every number carries a source_of_record saying whether it came from a legal filing or a press release, because those are not the same kind of fact and merging them is the defect this tool exists to prevent. Only an EXACT entity match after corporate suffixes are stripped populates an amount; a near match such as a differently named subsidiary goes to separate related_entity columns as a named lead and can never be summed into a total. Not Crunchbase and not a resold database. Read only; requires an APIFY_TOKEN and consumes Apify credits per call. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or misselection. The single tool has a clear, specific purpose that is unambiguously described.
The tool name follows a standard verb_noun pattern (get_company_funding_record). Since there is only one tool, there are no conflicting conventions or mixed naming styles.
A single tool feels thin for a server that could plausibly support related operations (e.g., searching companies, comparing records). However, the tool is substantive and not trivial, so it is borderline rather than an extreme mismatch.
The read-only scope is largely self-contained, covering primary sources and edge cases like near matches. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no support for non-UK/US jurisdictions or batch operations), but the core workflow of retrieving a company's funding record is well covered.