get_companyCompany identity and coverage manifest: name, CIK, exchange, SIC industry, the fiscal period of the latest data, the SEC filings that record is built from - the annual report and the latest quarterly report, each with its own fiscal year, accession number and EDGAR link - and the predicted next filing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ticker | Yes | Ticker symbol, case-insensitive. Examples: NVDA, brk-b. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable behavioral context about what the coverage manifest includes: the fiscal period of latest data, the specific SEC filings used, and the predicted next filing. No contradiction with 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 dense single sentence but front-loads the core concept with 'Company identity and coverage manifest' before enumerating contents. All listed details are relevant, though the long dash-separated list could be cleaner as structured bullets.
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?
With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return content, and it does so thoroughly: identity fields, latest data period, filing details with accession numbers and EDGAR links, and predicted next filing. Minor gaps like error behavior or empty results are not critical for this read-only look-up.
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?
The single parameter ticker already has a clear schema description with examples, including the brk-b format. The tool description adds no extra parameter-level information, so the baseline of 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?
States a specific verb-resource relationship: retrieving company identity and coverage information. The enumerated contents (name, CIK, exchange, SIC, filings, predicted next filing) make it clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_financials, get_key_figures, and get_narrative.
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 clearly implies use when company profile and coverage details are needed, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer it over alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling exclusions or routing conditions are 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.
Each tool targets a distinct concern: company identity, event digests, full financials, headline figures, narrative text, and company enumeration. Even the potentially overlapping get_financials and get_key_figures are explicitly differentiated by scope and purpose.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: get_company, get_events, get_financials, get_key_figures, get_narrative, list_companies. The single list_ verb is still predictable and consistent with the get_ verbs for enumerating a collection.
Six tools is a well-scoped size for a SEC-filing and company-data server. Each tool covers a meaningful slice of the domain without redundancy or unnecessary surface area.
The tool set covers the full read-only workflow: discover coverage, get company identity, retrieve summary or detailed financials, access qualitative narrative, and review recent material events. No obvious dead ends remain for fundamental SEC-based research.