Skip to main content
Glama

Complex Portal

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Entity Profile

entity_profile
Read-onlyIdempotent

"Tell me about X" / "research Acme" / "brief me on Tesla" / "what does Apple do" / "company profile for Microsoft" / "give me the rundown on NVDA" / "everything you know about $TICKER" — full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call. ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view. Fans out across SEC EDGAR, XBRL, USPTO patents, federal contracts (USAspending), FDA-licensed biologics (Purple Book), H-1B hiring (DOL LCA), news and GLEIF, and returns: cik + company_name (+ resolved_from/resolved_to when value was a name); recent_filings (up to 5 with pipeworx://edgar/company/{cik}/filings/{accession} URIs); fundamentals (LATEST 10-K Revenues + NetIncomeLoss + Cash, sorted period_end DESC); patents (USPTO PatentsView API sunset May 2025 — soft-fails until reactivated); federal_contracts (USAspending awards where the company is the recipient); fda_products (FDA-licensed biologics — vaccines, cell/gene therapies — from the Purple Book; a company with only small-molecule/generic drugs will show none here, that is expected, not a failure); hiring (H-1B sponsorship volume + salary range from DOL LCA filings); recent news mentions via GDELT→GNews fallback; LEI via GLEIF. sources_used / sources_failed say which of these actually returned data for THIS company — an empty section is a real "no data", not a bug. Pass a ticker ("AAPL"), zero-padded CIK ("0000320193"), OR a company name ("Moderna") — names now resolve via SEC EDGAR's company-name match; a private company (no CIK/ticker) returns resolved:false with an explicit notes line, not a bare failure. type accepts "company" or "ticker" interchangeably — both take the same value shapes above.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes"company" or "ticker" — both are accepted and behave identically; `value` can be a ticker, CIK, or company name either way. person/place coming soon.
valueYesTicker (e.g., "AAPL"), zero-padded CIK (e.g., "0000320193"), or company name (e.g., "Moderna") — names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Previous value: -"Entity type. Only \"company\" supported today; person/place coming soon."New value: +"\"company\" or \"ticker\" — both are accepted and behave identically; `value` can be a ticker, CIK, or company name either way. person/place coming soon."
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "company"
-]New value: +[
+  "company",
+  "ticker"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / value / description
      Previous value: -"Ticker (e.g., \"AAPL\") or zero-padded CIK (e.g., \"0000320193\"). Names not supported — use resolve_entity first if you only have a name."New value: +"Ticker (e.g., \"AAPL\"), zero-padded CIK (e.g., \"0000320193\"), or company name (e.g., \"Moderna\") — names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds rich behavioral context beyond annotations: the USPTO patents API soft-fails on sunset, FDA products being empty is 'expected, not a failure,' empty sections mean real 'no data' not a bug, private companies return resolved:false with an explicit notes line, and sources_used/sources_failed report which sources actually returned data. This fully discloses error and edge-case behavior.

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 long, but the tool is genuinely complex (8+ sources, no output schema, many edge cases) and every sentence earns its place — triggers are front-loaded, followed by the preference directive, sources, return shape, and failure semantics. A small deduction for being a dense wall of text without line breaks or sectioning.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully compensates: it enumerates return fields (cik, company_name, resolved_from/resolved_to, recent_filings with URIs, fundamentals from the LATEST 10-K), documents per-source behavior and fallbacks (GDELT→GNews), and explains failure semantics for private companies. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is omitted.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% — both `type` and `value` are fully documented in the schema, including the accepted input shapes (ticker, zero-padded CIK, company name). The description adds marginal nuance (resolved_from/resolved_to when a name is passed, interchangeable type values), but the schema already carries the parameter documentation burden, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb+resource: 'full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call,' with concrete trigger examples ('Tell me about X,' 'research Acme,' 'brief me on Tesla'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly contrasting with 'chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups,' making its scope unmistakable.

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?

Provides an explicit when-to-use directive: 'ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view,' naming both the condition and the alternative. The trigger examples further clarify when the tool is appropriate, and the input-format guidance (ticker, CIK, or name) removes ambiguity about invocation.

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

All Complex Portal toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools serve nearly identical purposes: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are currently functionally identical, and polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, and bet_research all hunt prediction-market opportunities with overlapping outputs. The verbose descriptions help, but an agent can easily call the wrong one.

Naming Consistency4/5

All 33 names use lowercase snake_case with descriptive, mostly verb-first words (ask_, compare_, discover_, search_), and domain suites are consistently prefixed (polymarket_*, pipeworx_*). Minor deviations like entity_profile or recent_changes (noun/adjective-first) keep it from a perfect 5.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is well into the 'too many' range, especially for a server nominally about the narrow Complex Portal database. Many tools (memory, feedback, subscriptions, trending) are generic meta-utilities unrelated to the stated purpose.

Completeness2/5

For the stated 'Complex Portal' domain, only search_complexes and get_complex exist, with no organism-scoped search, batch access, or additional lifecycle coverage, making the surface severely incomplete for that name. The actual Pipeworx platform is broadly covered, but the server-name mismatch makes the set feel incomplete for its advertised purpose.

Resources