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

The description adds that it returns ranked candidates with name, ticker, and CIK, and lists accepted identifier formats beyond the schema examples. With readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations already present, this provides useful extra behavioral context without contradicting them.

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 concise sentences front-load the core purpose and input types, follow with output details, and end with usage guidance. Every sentence adds value with no 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with good annotations, the description fully covers what input is accepted, what output to expect, and when to use it. No additional information is needed for an agent to invoke it 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?

The description extensively enriches the single parameter 'query' by listing all accepted formats (e.g., $NVDA, BRK.B, US ISIN) and explaining the resolution goal, going well beyond the schema's brief example.

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 the tool 'resolves any company identifier to its EDGAR identity' and enumerates the supported input types (ticker, name, CIK, ISIN, CUSIP), differentiating it from sibling tools that fetch specific filing or trading 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?

It explicitly says to use this tool when unsure of the exact ticker and before calling search tools, providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternative tools, but the context is strong.

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