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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the identity fields a successful resolution yields, though it does not say what happens on an ambiguous or unmatched query.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core verb and resource, followed by the return-field enumeration and the routing hint. No filler or redundancy.

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 an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and annotations cover the safety profile, so the essentials are present for a one-parameter lookup. The only gap is behavior on unmatched or multiple-match queries, which an agent might need when the query is a bare company name.

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 100% with a single required parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description restates 'stock ticker or company name' but omits the CIK input form that the schema explicitly supports, adding no meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 (resolve) and resource (ticker/company name to SEC identity) and enumerates the exact output fields: CIK, official name, ticker(s), exchange(s), SIC, fiscal year end. This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like financials or insider_transactions, which consume the identity rather than produce it.

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?

"Start here before other Filings Intel calls" gives explicit sequencing guidance that routes the agent correctly relative to its siblings. It stops short of naming individual alternatives (e.g., filing_search for document retrieval) or stating when this tool is unnecessary, but the workflow context is clear.

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