SEC EDGAR Filings MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

purchase_filing

Purchase and deliver a full SEC filing with alpha signals, causality events, and financial metrics. Requires a two-step on-chain USDC payment via Polygon.

Instructions

Purchase and deliver one full SEC filing row from fi_listings_portfolio (MPP v1.0 x402). [COST: xpay per-call + on-chain USDC data price (see FINANCE_FILING_PRICE_USD)] Full JSON includes alpha_signals with evidence_verified causality_events and financial_metrics from SEC CompanyFacts. Do NOT return agent_bundle or internal pipeline fields.

[AGENTIC WORKFLOW — mandatory 2-step 402 flow]: STEP 1: Call with document_id and network only; leave tx_hash EMPTY. STEP 2: Broadcast the exact transaction_payload on-chain (polygon USDC default). STEP 3: Call again with the same document_id, network, and confirmed tx_hash (66 chars).

[EXAMPLE ARGUMENTS - MINIMAL (Step 1 — payment info)]: {"document_id": "000000708426000023", "network": "polygon"}

"document_id": "000000708426000023", "network": "polygon", "tx_hash": "0x1234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef1234567890abcdef" }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`document_id`	Yes	document_id from search_filings or get_filing_sample.
`network`	No	Blockchain network. Default polygon (USDC). Also supports base.	polygon
`tx_hash`	No	Transaction hash. LEAVE EMPTY on first call to receive 402 payment instructions.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: the 402 payment flow, cost, return fields (including alpha_signals), and what is excluded (agent_bundle, internal pipeline fields). It also explains the two-step call pattern.

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 well-structured with sections for cost, workflow, and examples. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. While effective, it could be slightly more concise by removing some redundant details.

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 complexity of the tool (multi-step 402 payment), the description covers all necessary context: workflow, cost, return format, constraints, and output schema via example. It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, but the description adds significant meaning beyond schema: it clarifies the role of tx_hash in the workflow, provides default values for network, and offers minimal and maximal example arguments that illustrate usage.

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 clearly states the tool purchases and delivers a full SEC filing row, specifying the source (fi_listings_portfolio) and version. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_filings and get_filing_sample by focusing on purchase and delivery.

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 provides explicit step-by-step instructions for the 402 payment flow, including when to leave tx_hash empty and when to provide it. It mentions cost and network options, but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or provide direct comparisons with siblings.

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

Deploy Server