Skip to main content
Glama

Tcgdex

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

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations are readOnly/openWorld/idempotent and non-destructive, but the description goes well beyond them by explaining what each section means (e.g., an empty section is a real 'no data', not a bug) and how private companies resolve (resolved:false with explicit notes line). It also reveals the fallback chain GDELT→GNews and source failure reporting, which is valuable behavioral context not visible in 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 and detailed but earns its length by enumerating sources, return fields, and fallback behavior. It front-loads the core purpose and user-intent triggers before diving into mechanics. Slight redundancy in repeating every data source twice (once in the fan-out list, once in the return-field list) costs a little conciseness.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description is unusually complete: it previews cik, company_name, recent_filings URI format, fundamentals fields, sources_used/sources_failed semantics, and the resolved:false edge case. An agent can call this tool and interpret its result without guessing.

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%, yet the description still adds meaning: it clarifies that `type` accepts both enums interchangeably, that `value` may be ticker/CIK/name, and how names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match. It even documents resolved_from/resolved_to return context tied to the `value` parameter. This enriches rather than merely restates 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 uses a specific verb phrase ('full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call') and names the entity type (US public company) plus the exact fan-out sources. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like resolve_entity and ask_pipeworx by emphasizing the one-call holistic profile behavior.

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 'ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view,' giving direct routing guidance. It also lists the exact user-phrase triggers, which is strong context for an agent choosing among many siblings. No alternative tool is named, but the guidance is decisive enough for a profile request.

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

All Tcgdex 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
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple clusters of near-overlapping tools: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are described as sharing identical routing (beta currently matches stable exactly), and polymarket_edges/polymarket_arbitrage/bet_research all surface 'betting opportunities' with only subtle distinctions agents will struggle to select between. ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence and entity_profile vs compare_entities compound the ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names mostly follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (get_card, list_sets, search_cards, subscribe, unsubscribe, discover_tools, validate_claim). Minor deviations exist (entity_profile, bet_research, remember/recall/forget, pipeline prefix families like ask_pipeworx_* and polymarket_*), but the conventions are readable and predictable overall.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is heavy per calibration (25+), and the vast majority are unrelated to the server's apparent TCGdex purpose — only 4 of 35 tools touch trading cards. The count is bloated with Pipeworx/Polymarket/memory/subscription tools that belong to a different server.

Completeness2/5

The actual TCGdex subset (list_sets, get_set, search_cards, get_card) covers basic read-only lookup but has gaps — no set search, no type/rarity/attribute filtering, no pagination, no serie endpoints. The other 31 tools serve disparate domains (data lookup, prediction markets, memory, npm scanning), so no coherent domain surface is actually complete.

Resources