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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive search. The description adds useful domain behavior beyond annotations, especially the meaning of succession_filing and how predecessor filings may be filed under a different CIK.

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 front-loaded with the core search behavior and return data, then adds a useful edge-case paragraph. It is longer than strictly necessary, but every section has a clear purpose and the Args block is efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description needn't fully document return values, but it still provides helpful context about CIK, names, tickers, and SIC fields. Combined with the successor-filing explanation and parameter details, it is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden and mostly compensates: it explains query as company name or ticker with examples, and limit as max results with range 1–50 and default 10. It could be slightly more precise about matching behavior, but the essential parameter meaning is present.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: search for companies by name or ticker. It also clarifies the return contents (CIK, known names, ticker symbols, SIC code/name) and states its role in finding a company's CIK before using other tools.

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?

It clearly says to use this tool to find a company's CIK before using other tools, which is strong routing guidance among siblings. It also explains the successor-filing edge case and points to search_document for predecessor lookup, though it does not explicitly contrast with similar discovery tools like list_companies_by_sic.

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