Skip to main content
Glama

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 mark the tool as read-only/idempotent, and the description adds substantial non-obvious behavior: it fans out across SEC EDGAR, XBRL, USPTO, USAspending, FDA Purple Book, DOL LCA, GDELT→GNews, and GLEIF; USPTO soft-fails after the API sunset; FDA results are limited to licensed biologics; and sources_used/sources_failed distinguish real no-data from failures.

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 front-loaded with purpose and query examples, and the dense length is largely justified by the tool's many sources and edge cases. It loses a point for being a single run-on paragraph with some redundancy at the end about type interchangeability, which the schema already covers.

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 burden of explaining the return shape, and it does so thoroughly: it enumerates cik, resolved_from/resolved_to, recent_filings, fundamentals, patents, federal_contracts, fda_products, hiring, news, and LEI, plus fallbacks, empty-section semantics, and private-company behavior. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call this correctly.

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%, and the schema already documents that type accepts company/ticker interchangeably and that value can be a ticker, zero-padded CIK, or company name. The description restates these constraints without adding meaningful new parameter semantics 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?

The description states a specific purpose: produce a full cross-source profile of a US public company in one parallel call, and anchors it with concrete user phrasings like "Tell me about X" and "brief me on Tesla." It also distinguishes itself from chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups, making its scope clear against similar research tools.

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?

The description explicitly says to ALWAYS PREFER this tool over chaining single-pack lookups when the user wants a holistic view, and includes representative triggers. It also explains the private-company case (resolved:false with notes) and the expected-empty FDA section, so an agent knows when a thin result is normal rather than a failure.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools form near-overlapping clusters: ask_pipeworx/ask_pipeworx_beta/ask_pipeworx_grounded/deep_research all route questions, and bet_research/polymarket_edges/polymarket_arbitrage/polymarket_fill_risk/polymarket_kalshi_spread all target prediction-market edges. ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx today, so an agent must read long descriptions to pick correctly. Most other tools are distinct, but the ambiguous clusters pull the score down.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names use snake_case and are readable, but conventions mix: many are verb_noun (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, discover_tools, subscribe), several are noun phrases (macro_snapshot, indicator, entity_profile, polymarket_arbitrage), and a few are adjective_noun (recent_alerts, deep_research). The near-duplicate ask_pipeworx / ask_pipeworx_beta / ask_pipeworx_grounded suffixes form the only consistent family, but overall the naming pattern is not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is well beyond the 15-tool well-scoped range and even past the 25-tool 'too many' threshold. The server tries to be a data router, prediction-market desk, AI visibility checker, memory store, and subscription manager all at once, and includes an intentional duplicate (ask_pipeworx_beta). Several tools (remember/recall/forget, subscribe/unsubscribe/list_subscriptions/recent_alerts) could be their own server.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers question answering, deep research, entity resolution/profile/comparison, macro indicators, prediction-market analytics, subscriptions, memory, and feedback—no obvious dead ends for the main workflows. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct generic web search, no update for saved memory other than overwrite, and some niche additions like generate_llms_txt feel out of place), but the core data and research lifecycle is well covered.