Skip to main content
Glama

Doffin

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Recent Changes

recent_changes
Read-onlyIdempotent

"What's new with X" / "latest on Y" / "what happened to Z this week / month / quarter" / "updates on Acme" / "news on Tesla recently" / "what's happening with Apple" — change feed for a company in the last N days/weeks/months in ONE parallel call. Fans out to SEC EDGAR (filings since since), GDELT→GNews fallback (news mentions in window — GDELT preferred, GNews when rate-limited or 5xx), USPTO (patents granted; PatentsView API sunset May 2025 so this soft-fails until reactivated). since accepts ISO date ("2026-04-01") or relative shorthand ("7d", "30d", "3m", "1y"). Returns structured changes[] grouped by source + total_changes count + pipeworx:// citation URIs. Use entity_profile instead when you want the static profile (filings + fundamentals + LEI + patents) regardless of window.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesEntity type. Only "company" supported today.
sinceYesWindow start — ISO date ("2026-04-01") or relative ("7d", "30d", "3m", "1y"). Use "30d" or "1m" for typical monitoring.
valueYesTicker (e.g., "AAPL") or zero-padded CIK (e.g., "0000320193").

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Describes fan-out behavior, source fallback (GDELT→GNews on rate limits/5xx), USPTO soft-fail, and return structure (grouped changes, total_changes, URIs). Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent; this adds rich behavioral context.

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?

Description is thorough yet efficient, front-loaded with example queries. All information is relevant, though slightly verbose in listing time-relative examples. No wasted sentences.

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 3 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description fully explains tool behavior, sources, fallback, and return structure. Provides enough context 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%; description adds value by explaining 'since' accepts ISO or relative shorthand, recommends '30d', and clarifies 'value' accepts ticker or CIK. These details enhance usability beyond the schema.

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?

Description uses specific verb+resource ('change feed for a company') and provides example queries that clearly define scope. Differentiates from sibling tool 'entity_profile' explicitly.

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 states when to use (change feed queries) and when not ('Use entity_profile for static profile'). Provides parameter recommendations (e.g., 'Use \"30d\" for typical monitoring').

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

All Doffin 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tool clusters have fuzzy boundaries: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are described as currently identical, and ask_pipeworx/deep_research/validate_claim overlap for factual research. Polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, and bet_research also all surface betting opportunities, while ai_visibility_check and scan_competitor_ai_presence serve nearly the same purpose.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are readable and mostly snake_case, but the pattern is mixed: doffin_* and polymarket_* use domain-prefixed nouns, ask_pipeworx* uses verb+product, and remember/recall/forget/subscribe are bare verbs. There is no single predictable verb_noun convention, though each internal cluster is somewhat consistent.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is heavy for a server named Doffin, and only three tools actually relate to Norwegian procurement. The remaining surface is mostly general Pipeworx data access, prediction-market analysis, and memory utilities, which feels like several servers bundled under one misleading name.

Completeness3/5

For Doffin read-only access, search + recent + notice detail covers the core workflow well. However, the server's actual domain is fragmented across procurement, Pipeworx research, prediction markets, memory, and subscriptions, which makes coverage difficult to reason about and leaves minor gaps such as no subscription update capability.

Resources