Download detailed 10-K reports in XLSX format with the Financial Reports Form 10-K XLSX API. Effortlessly access and analyze annual financial data for companies in a spreadsheet-friendly format.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | Yes | Year of the report | |
| period | Yes | Period (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, or FY) | |
| symbol | Yes | Stock symbol |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that the tool downloads XLSX data, but does not describe response format, auth requirements, rate limits, pagination, or the fact that the tool may accept quarterly periods despite 'annual' wording.
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 short but includes promotional filler like 'Effortlessly access and analyze' and redundant API naming. It is front-loaded with the core action, but the second sentence adds little value and the phrasing 'Financial Reports Form 10-K XLSX API' is awkward.
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?
No output schema exists and no annotations are provided, so the description needs to explain more about what the XLSX contains and how to use it. It fails to address the quarterly vs annual contradiction, does not state what the downloaded file includes, and gives no indication of how to select the right period for a 10-K report.
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%, so each parameter (symbol, year, period) is already documented. The description adds the format context (XLSX) but does not clarify the meaning of 'period' in relation to the 10-K label, nor does it explain whether FY is the only valid period for 10-K reports.
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 states the tool downloads detailed 10-K reports in XLSX format, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it creates ambiguity by calling them '10-K' (annual) reports while the schema includes quarterly periods (Q1-Q4), and it does not clearly differentiate from the sibling getFinancialReportJSON beyond format.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like getFinancialReportJSON or getFinancialReportsDates. The phrase 'Effortlessly access and analyze annual financial data' is generic and does not explain valid use cases, period restrictions, or exclusions.
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.