Get the filing history for a nonprofit organization.
Returns a list of all available IRS 990 filings for the organization,
including both filings with parsed data and those without. Useful for
tracking financial trends over time.
Args:
ein: Employer Identification Number (e.g. '13-1837418' or '131837418').
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ein | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Describes returning all available filings including parsed and unparsed, but no annotations provided. No mention of read-only, auth, or rate limits. Adequate but not comprehensive.
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?
Concise, front-loaded with purpose, then details and parameter section. Every sentence adds value.
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?
Simple tool with one parameter and output schema exists. Description covers what it does, what it returns, and parameter format. Complete for its complexity.
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?
Single parameter 'ein' explained with example format (dashed or plain). Schema coverage is 0%, so description adds essential meaning beyond the type string.
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?
Clear verb 'Get' and specific resource 'filing history for a nonprofit organization'. Distinguishes from siblings: get_nonprofit_details (likely details) and search_nonprofits (search).
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?
States it's 'useful for tracking financial trends over time' but no explicit when-not-to-use or comparison to siblings. Usage is implied.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose: search_nonprofits for finding EINs by name/keyword, get_nonprofit_details for comprehensive data on a specific EIN, and get_nonprofit_filings for filing history. No overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (search_nonprofits, get_nonprofit_details, get_nonprofit_filings). The verbs are clear actions and nouns specify the resource.
With 3 tools, the set is small but appropriately scoped for querying IRS 990 data. It covers search, detailed lookups, and filing histories without unnecessary bloat.
The tool surface covers key operations: search, retrieve details, and get filing history. However, there is no tool to retrieve a specific filing document (e.g., raw PDF), which could be a minor gap for users needing full forms.