mcp-hkex-filing

list_references

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find filings that reference a company or list its own filings by ticker. Returns graph-linked edges with paging so you can trace cross-references and ownership.

Instructions

Use this to explore the graph edges between companies and filings.

Use search_filings(ticker=...) for a company's own filings or search_filings( referenced_ticker=...) to find mentions via the filing column. This reads the canonical edge tables keyed on ticker (format like 0700.HK; discover valid values via list_companies(view="tickers")): kind="referenced_by" returns filings whose title mentions the company (cross-references), kind="owned" returns the company's own filings. Results are paged via limit/offset and stay empty until graph linking has been run. This tool is read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	No	referenced_by = filings that mention this company; owned = this company's own filings.	referenced_by
`limit`	No	Maximum edges to return (1..100).
`offset`	No	Zero-based offset for paging.
`ticker`	Yes	Company ticker, e.g. 0700.HK; use list_companies(view='tickers') to discover.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.9Sep 30, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / ticker / description

Previous value: -"Company ticker, e.g. 0700.HK; use list_tickers to discover."New value: +"Company ticker, e.g. 0700.HK; use list_companies(view='tickers') to discover."

Addedv0.1.3Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: results are paged via limit/offset and 'stay empty until graph linking has been run' — a non-obvious precondition an agent would otherwise misread as a bug.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then alternatives, then semantics and caveats. Every sentence carries information, though the parenthetical list_companies reference and repeated ticker format make it slightly longer than strictly necessary.

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?

An output schema exists so return shapes need no explanation, and the description still covers the paging model, the empty-until-linked precondition, the kind semantics, ticker validation, and read-only status. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining what kind='referenced_by' vs 'owned' mean in graph terms (title-mention cross-references vs the company's own filings) and reiterates the ticker format with a discovery path, giving the enum semantics real operational meaning.

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 ('explore the graph edges between companies and filings') and immediately names the sibling tools (search_filings) it must not be confused with. An agent can distinguish it from get_filings/search_filings without opening any 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: search_filings(ticker=...) for a company's own filings vs search_filings(referenced_ticker=...) for mentions, and explains that this tool reads canonical edge tables. It also names list_companies(view='tickers') as the discovery path for valid ticker values.

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

Deploy Server