Get recent SEC EDGAR filings for any public company. Filter by form type (10-K annual, 10-Q quarterly, 8-K events, 4 insider trades, DEF 14A proxy).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cik | No | SEC CIK number (alternative to ticker) | |
| form | No | Form type: 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, 4, DEF 14A, S-1, 13F | |
| limit | No | Number of results (max 25) | |
| ticker | No | Stock ticker (e.g. AAPL, MSFT, TSLA) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral aspects. It only states it 'gets' filings, leaving out details like authentication, rate limits, pagination, or that it's a read-only operation. The description is too minimal for a tool with no annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that conveys the core purpose and key features. No unnecessary words, and it is front-loaded with the main function.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema and simple parameters, the description is adequate but could be improved by explaining what 'recent' means and the expected return format. It does not cover all possible informational needs for an agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds marginal value. It reinforces the form type examples (e.g., 10-K, 10-Q) but does not explain parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it gets recent SEC EDGAR filings for any public company and mentions filtering by form type. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_insider_trades or get_earnings_data.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies it's for retrieving filings, but does not explicitly guide when to use it vs. alternatives like get_insider_trades or get_material_events. No when-not guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target distinct SEC-related data (earnings, insider trades, material events, filings), but get_material_events and get_recent_filings both handle 8-K filings, creating minor overlap. The FDA data tool is wholly unrelated, increasing potential confusion about the server's scope.
All tool names follow a consistent 'get_{category}_data' or 'get_{entity}' pattern (e.g., get_earnings_data, get_insider_trades). The verb_noun structure is uniform and predictable, aiding agent selection.
With 5 tools, the count is reasonable, but the inclusion of get_fda_data (FDA, not SEC) makes the set feel scattershot rather than focused. The server title 'SEC Filings & Earnings' suggests a narrower scope, so the tool count includes an outlier.
For SEC filings, the server covers key types: XBRL earnings, insider trades (Form 4), material events (8-K), and a general filings search. Missing structured 10-K/10-Q data and filing text retrieval are minor gaps. The FDA tool is an unrelated addition, not a gap.