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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: data is sourced from each company's 10-K via SEC EDGAR's XBRL company-facts API, and the operation requires no API key. It also clarifies the table is a free preview and exactly what the paid edition would add.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences deliver the core retrieval behavior, the returned columns, the data provenance, and the free-vs-paid distinction without redundancy. The most important information is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description carries full responsibility for explaining the response and it does so by listing the table's columns and their source. The comparison to the paid report closes the main contextual gap an agent might have about what this free tool does not include.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema already fully documents the input surface. Per the baseline for empty parameter sets, the description cannot add parameter-level meaning, and none is needed.

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 uses a clear verb-resource pair: 'Get the free FY2025 preview table' from the Industry Primer, and enumerates the exact columns returned. It also differentiates this tool from the paid report by listing what the paid version adds, so an agent can tell it apart from industry-primers__get_industry_primer_info.

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 explains what the free tool provides versus the paid report, noting the free table is the one already on the tool page and explicitly stating 'Free, no key.' It does not name a sibling alternative by tool ID, but for a zero-parameter lookup the context is sufficient to avoid confusion with the info tool.

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