Skip to main content
Glama

Openagenda

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. First observed

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. Description adds details on fan-out to multiple sources, fallback logic, soft-failures, and output structure 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Concise, front-loaded with examples, all sentences add value. No wasted words.

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?

Despite no output schema, description explains return structure (grouped changes, total_changes, citation URIs) and covers all complexity including fallbacks and soft-failures.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%. Description adds meaning by explaining since formats, suggesting '30d', and clarifying value as ticker or CIK.

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 the tool provides a change feed for a company, with example queries. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool entity_profile.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs. entity_profile, fallback behavior for data sources, and parameter usage with typical defaults.

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

All Openagenda 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tools have overlapping roles: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and suggest_questions all answer or route questions, and ask_pipeworx_beta is currently identical to ask_pipeworx. The descriptions do a good job of prescribing when to use each, and the polymarket, memory, and subscription families are mostly distinct, but boundaries are easy to miss.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most names are readable snake_case and families like ask_pipeworx_* and polymarket_* are consistent, but the set mixes verb_noun tools like compare_entities and validate_claim with noun phrases like entity_profile and recent_changes, plus bare verbs like events and forget. There is no single predictable naming pattern across the full set.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is well over the 25+ threshold, and the count is padded by a large Pipeworx research and prediction-market stack alongside just two OpenAgenda-specific tools. A server named Openagenda would be better served by a much smaller, focused event-calendar set, or by splitting unrelated capabilities into separate servers.

Completeness2/5

For OpenAgenda, the surface is essentially read-only: search_agendas plus events, with no agenda/event creation, update, deletion, or detailed single-resource views. The Pipeworx side is comparatively richer, but that does not fill the gaps in the domain the server name advertises.

Resources