Skip to main content
Glama

Hts

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?

Even with annotations declaring readOnly/openWorld/idempotent, the description adds substantial behavioral detail: the parallel fan-out across sources, sources_used/sources_failed semantics, soft-failure of the USPTO PatentsView sunset, expected empty FDA sections for non-biologic companies, and resolved:false behavior for private companies. 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 long but appropriately detailed for a complex cross-source tool. It front-loads example queries and the key preference rule, then systematically covers sources, return fields, and edge cases. Some redundancy with the schema exists, but every sentence earns its place.

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 full return contract: every output section is listed, fallback behavior is explained, failure semantics are clarified ('an empty section is a real "no data", not a bug'), and edge cases like private companies are covered. Nothing essential for correct invocation 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?

The schema already covers both parameters at 100%, and the description adds meaning beyond it: concrete accepted shapes (ticker, zero-padded CIK, name), SEC EDGAR name resolution, private-company fallback behavior, and that 'company'/'ticker' are interchangeable. This goes beyond simple schema repetition.

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 pair: building a full cross-source profile of a US public company in one parallel call. It lists concrete example queries ('Tell me about X', 'research Acme', 'company profile for Microsoft') and explicitly distinguishes itself from chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups.

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 explicitly instructs 'ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view' and provides clear trigger phrases. It does not explicitly discuss when to prefer alternatives like deep_research or compare_entities, so exclusions are slightly incomplete.

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

All Hts 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 tools overlap heavily: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all route questions to the same 5,529-tool catalog, with ask_pipeworx_beta currently identical to ask_pipeworx. The Polymarket suite also has ambiguous boundaries (bet_research vs. polymarket_edges vs. polymarket_arbitrage), and scan_competitor_ai_presence simply wraps ai_visibility_check, so agents may struggle to choose the right tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and readable, but the set mixes verb-led names (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, scan_dependency, validate_claim, hts_search) with noun-led names (entity_profile, recent_alerts, polymarket_edges, ai_visibility_check). Variant suffixes like ask_pipeworx_beta / ask_pipeworx_grounded add further inconsistency, so the naming is coherent enough but not predictable enough for a 4.

Tool Count2/5

At 33 tools, the server exceeds the 25-tool threshold for 'too many' in the rubric. Even though the broad data-research scope justifies a larger surface, the count feels bloated because several tools are near-duplicates (e.g., ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) or wrappers (scan_competitor_ai_presence), making the set heavier than necessary.

Completeness4/5

The server covers its core domains thoroughly: data querying (ask_pipeworx family, deep_research), entity resolution and comparison (resolve_entity, entity_profile, compare_entities), verification (validate_claim, ask_pipeworx_grounded), HTS tariff lookup (search + detail), subscription lifecycle (subscribe/unsubscribe/list/recent_alerts), and memory (remember/recall/forget). Minor gaps exist, such as no subscription-update endpoint and no generic raw-source export, but these are workaround-able and do not cause agent failures.

Resources