Skip to main content
Glama

Mbta

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?

The annotations already declare this read-only and idempotent, and the description adds meaningful context beyond that: it discloses that USPTO data may soft-fail, that empty fda_products is expected for small-molecule companies, that empty sections mean no data rather than a bug, and that unresolved private companies return resolved:false with a notes line. These behaviors are exactly the kind agents need to interpret results correctly.

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 very long but dense, and the most important guidance (when to use it and what it fans out) is front-loaded. It includes some redundancy with the schema's type description, but every sentence carries functional value for an agent, which justifies the length for a tool with this much output complexity.

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?

Given there is no output schema, this description carries the full burden of explaining the return contract. It covers the main output groups, source tracking, expected empty cases, fallback behavior, and edge-case handling for private companies. A caller has enough context to call the tool and interpret any result shape without further inference.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already provides a solid baseline. The description adds real value with concrete examples (AAPL, zero-padded CIK, 'Moderna'), clarifies that type is effectively ignored, and explains when names resolve via SEC EDGAR. It goes beyond the schema, though the schema alone is already nearly sufficient.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it creates a full cross-source profile of one US public company in a single parallel call. It enumerates the exact data sources and output fields, making the tool's purpose and scope immediately distinguishable from chained single-purpose 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 states when to prefer this tool ('ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack ... lookups when the user asks for a holistic view') and what inputs it accepts. It does not explicitly name sibling tools like compare_entities or resolve_entity as alternatives, but it gives clear selection criteria that an agent can act on.

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

All Mbta 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

ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly stated to be currently identical to ask_pipeworx, which is a direct duplication. The polymarket cluster (bet_research, polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_fill_risk, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_kalshi_spread) has heavily overlapping purposes around finding and validating betting edges, and the ask_pipeworx / ask_pipeworx_grounded / deep_research / validate_claim tools all handle natural-language 'look up X' queries, making misselection likely without reading lengthy descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

snake_case is uniform and helpful prefixes (mbta_, polymarket_, pipeworx_, ask_pipeworx) create recognizable families. However, verb style is inconsistent — imperative verbs like ask/compare/discover/validate mix with noun-first names like bet_research, entity_profile, and search_within, and the memory trio (remember/recall/forget) doesn't share a common prefix.

Tool Count2/5

At 35 tools this exceeds the comfortable range, and the count is inflated by near-duplicates (ask_pipeworx_beta) and a dense 6-tool polymarket family. The server also mixes unrelated domains — only 4 of 35 tools are MBTA transit tools while the rest are Pipeworx data research, prediction markets, memory, and subscriptions — making it a kitchen sink rather than a well-scoped set.

Completeness4/5

The Pipeworx research surface is thorough: query, grounded verification, deep research, entity resolution, profiles, comparisons, change feeds, claim validation, and subscriptions are all covered with few dead ends. Minor gaps exist — the MBTA portion lacks schedule/line-detail tools beyond departures and alerts, and the AI-visibility feature feels bolted on without deeper integration.

Resources