Skip to main content
Glama

Meteors

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. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate safe read-only behavior. The description adds details: fans out to multiple sources, fallback from GDELT to GNews on rate limits or 5xx, USPTO soft-fail until reactivated, and output structure. This provides behavioral context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 example queries and packs useful information without significant fluff. It is somewhat lengthy but each sentence contributes value. Could be slightly tighter but overall efficient.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description adequately explains return structure (changes[] grouped by source, total_changes count, citation URIs). It covers purpose, parameters, behavior, and alternatives, making it complete for a complex multi-source tool.

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%, so baseline 3. The description adds meaning: examples for `since` (ISO date and relative shorthand), typical monitoring value ("30d" or "1m"), and clarifications for `value` (ticker or CIK) and `type` (only "company"). This exceeds schema descriptions.

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 clearly states it provides a change feed for a company in a recent time window, listing specific data sources (SEC EDGAR, GDELT→GNews, USPTO) and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool entity_profile by advising when to use that instead.

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 provides example queries and guidance on when to use entity_profile instead. It explains fallback behavior and `since` format. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use this tool beyond the one sibling alternative.

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

All Meteors 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
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools serve nearly identical purposes: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly functionally identical right now, and ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, and suggest_questions all overlap as query/discovery entry points. The six prediction-market tools (bet_research, polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_fill_risk, polymarket_kalshi_spread) also blur together for agents looking to find or size a trade.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is inconsistent: some tools use get_/list_/scan_ prefixes while others are bare nouns (polymarket_edges, entity_profile, recent_alerts), and the Pipeworx prefix appears only on some tools (pipeworx_feedback, pipeworx_trending) while equivalent tools are named ask_pipeworx or deep_research. Verb styles vary between imperative (validate_claim, resolve_entity) and descriptive (bet_research, polymarket_arbitrage).

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is heavy for a server whose name (Meteors) covers only 3 of them. The bulk belongs to unrelated domains — Pipeworx data access, prediction markets, memory, npm scanning, llms.txt generation — making the surface feel like an unfocused grab bag rather than a deliberate product. Many of the 34 tools could be consolidated (e.g., the three near-identical ask_pipeworx variants).

Completeness2/5

The server has no coherent domain to assess completeness against: meteor data is limited to three lookups with no management/CRUD, memory tools have save/recall/delete but no update, and the Pipeworx surface lacks obvious editing or administrative operations beyond subscriptions. The prediction-market toolset is thorough, but it sits awkwardly beside unrelated utilities, leaving the overall tool surface feeling incomplete for any single stated purpose.

Resources