Skip to main content
Glama

List SEC filings

edgar_list_filings
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get a company's SEC filings newest first, showing form type, dates, and document URL. Filter by form or period to locate specific reports.

Instructions

List a company's SEC filings, newest first, with form type, dates, accession number and document URL. Common forms: 10-K (annual), 10-Q (quarterly), 8-K (material events; see 'items', e.g. 2.02 = earnings), DEF 14A (proxy/executive pay), 4 (insider trades), S-1 (IPO), 13D/13G (5%+ holders), 20-F/6-K (foreign issuers).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formsNoOnly these form types, e.g. ['10-K','10-Q','8-K']. Amendments ('10-K/A') match their base form.
limitNoMaximum filings (default 20).
companyYesCompany: US ticker ('MSFT', 'BRK.B'), SEC CIK ('789019') or company name ('Microsoft').
end_dateNoFiled on/before (YYYY-MM-DD).
start_dateNoFiled on/after (YYYY-MM-DD).
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (readable, default) or 'json' (structured).markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond that: results are newest-first and include form type, dates, accession number, and document URL.

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?

Two compact sentences deliver the core purpose, output shape, ordering, and a useful forms reference with no wasted words. The most important information 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?

For a list tool with rich annotations and full schema coverage, this description is sufficiently complete. It even supplies the return shape despite the lack of an output schema.

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%, so the schema carries most parameter meaning. The description adds domain value beyond the schema, especially the form-type glossary and the note that 8-K items such as 2.02 indicate earnings.

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 action ('List'), a concrete resource ('a company's SEC filings'), and defines the output fields and ordering. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like edgar_read_filing and edgar_get_company_info.

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 first sentence clearly identifies when to use the tool: to list a company's SEC filings. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, leaving some routing decisions to inference, but the context is unmistakable.

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