mcp-hkex-filing

verify_sinks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check that configured sinks agree on filings by comparing document hashes, or run count-only parity checks to spot missing, extra, or mismatched entries.

Instructions

Use this to check that configured sinks agree on their filings.

mode="hashes" (default) compares (filing_id, document_sha256) sets across comparable sinks and returns a bounded sample of any missing/extra/mismatched ids. mode="counts" runs a faster count-only parity check, returning per-sink counts and the spread (parity is OK when the spread is zero). For a per-sink total or a grouped breakdown use get_statistics, and for monthly scrape coverage use get_coverage. Parameter relationships: sinks must list two or more comparable sink ids from list_sinks (empty compares every comparable pair); sample_size bounds the examples returned per problem bucket, not the comparison itself, and is ignored by mode="counts". This tool is read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mode`	No	Comparison depth: "hashes" (default) compares per-filing ids and document hashes; "counts" is a quick per-sink count parity check.	hashes
`sinks`	No	Restrict to a subset of sink ids, comma-separated; empty = all.
`sample_size`	No	Max examples to return per problem bucket (1..50).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.8Sep 30, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / mode

Added value: +{
+  "default": "hashes",
+  "description": "Comparison depth: \"hashes\" (default) compares per-filing ids and document hashes; \"counts\" is a quick per-sink count parity check.",
+  "title": "Mode",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.3Sep 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / sample_size

Added value: +{
+  "default": 5,
+  "description": "Max examples to return per problem bucket (1..50).",
+  "title": "Sample Size",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / sinks

Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Restrict to a subset of sink ids, comma-separated; empty = all.",
+  "title": "Sinks",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail: it explains the return shape (bounded samples of missing/extra/mismatched ids, per-sink counts and spread, parity OK when spread is zero) and clarifies that sample_size bounds examples rather than the comparison and is ignored in counts mode. It also notes the tool is read-only, reinforcing annotations without contradicting them.

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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, then mode details, alternatives, and parameter relationships, with no filler. It is a bit dense and includes one redundant sentence ("This tool is read-only"), but the length is justified by the tool's comparison modes and cross-parameter constraints.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, the 100% schema coverage, annotations, and an existing output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: when to use each mode, what the tool returns, parameter constraints, and explicit alternatives. No critical gap remains for correct invocation.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful cross-parameter semantics beyond the schema: sinks must list two or more comparable sink ids from list_sinks, empty compares every comparable pair, and sample_size bounds examples per problem bucket rather than the comparison itself and is ignored by mode="counts". These relationships are not captured in the input schema descriptions.

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 and resource: check that configured sinks agree on their filings, and clarifies the two modes (hashes vs counts). It also names sibling tools get_statistics and get_coverage for adjacent tasks, so an agent can distinguish this tool's purpose 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance for each mode and names alternatives: use get_statistics for per-sink totals or grouped breakdowns, and get_coverage for monthly scrape coverage. It also states that sinks must list two or more comparable sink ids from list_sinks, and that empty compares every comparable pair.

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

Deploy Server