Skip to main content
Glama

Fda Regulations

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

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations establish read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior; the description adds substantial context beyond that: parallel fan-out across sources, fallbacks (GDELT→GNews), soft-failure for USPTO, source_used/sources_failed semantics, and resolved_from/resolved_to for name inputs. No contradiction with annotations.

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 dense and front-loaded with trigger phrases and examples, but it is long and somewhat repetitive in places — the 'type accepts company/ticker interchangeably' point appears both in prose and in the schema. Still, every major section earns its place and the flow is logical.

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 carries the burden of explaining return values, and it does so thoroughly: top-level fields, per-source sections, recent_filings URIs, fundamentals metrics, source success/failure reporting, and proprietary edge cases. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke this 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 schema already covers both parameters at 100%, but the description adds real semantic value: the type field is explicitly interchangeable, names resolve via SEC EDGAR, and concrete examples map values like 'AAPL', '0000320193', and 'Moderna' to the same value slot. This reduces ambiguity beyond schema alone.

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 names a specific verb-resource pair — full cross-source profile of a US public company in one parallel call — and enumerates the exact data sources. It distinguishes itself from chained single-pack lookups and siblings like resolve_entity or deep_research by explicitly stating its holistic scope.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view.' It also clarifies expected edge cases, such as private companies returning resolved:false and empty sections meaning genuinely no data, which helps the agent decide whether this tool is appropriate.

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

All Fda Regulations 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation1/5

The tool set contains near-duplicate query tools (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) and many overlapping accessors (deep_research, validate_claim, fda_search, fda_regulation). The server name 'Fda Regulations' is also misleading because the vast majority of tools (e.g., polymarket_*, generate_llms_txt, remember) have nothing to do with FDA regulations, making correct selection extremely difficult.

Naming Consistency2/5

Most names use snake_case, but the verb/noun pattern is inconsistent: some are verb-first (ask_pipeworx, generate_llms_txt, validate_claim), some are noun-first (entity_profile, recent_changes, pipeworx_trending), and the ask_pipeworx_beta/grounded variants break the convention. Some names are also semantically misleading (scan_dependency checks an npm package rather than scanning a dependency).

Tool Count1/5

With 33 tools, this is far too many for a server nominally about FDA regulations; only two tools directly address that domain. Even as a general-purpose data platform, 33 tools is excessive and includes many unrelated utilities (e.g., generate_llms_txt, scan_dependency), making the server's scope unclear and bloated.

Completeness2/5

For the stated FDA regulations purpose, only fda_regulation (get by citation) and fda_search (keyword search) exist, providing basic read coverage but no access to FDA data (drug labels, adverse events, recalls), guidance documents, or regulatory history. The many unrelated tools do not fill these gaps, so the surface is severely incomplete for its apparent purpose.

Resources