The Bulk Income Statement API allows users to retrieve detailed income statement data in bulk. This API is designed for large-scale data analysis, providing comprehensive insights into a company's financial performance, including revenue, gross profit, expenses, and net income.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | Yes | Year (e.g., 2023) | |
| period | Yes | Period (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, FY) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It only offers a generic statement about retrieving data and mentions large-scale analysis, without addressing required parameters, return format, or any side effects or limitations.
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 concise at two sentences, with the verb and purpose front-loaded. It avoids excessive detail but includes a somewhat redundant second sentence that adds little new information.
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 output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values, required inputs beyond the schema, and usage context. It fails to mention that only year and period are parameters (and no company identifier), how results are structured, or any examples.
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 the parameters year and period are already documented. The description adds a few financial metrics but doesn't map them to parameters or clarify the missing company identifier, which is a notable gap beyond the schema.
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 retrieves income statement data in bulk, using a specific verb and resource. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from other bulk statement tools, but the income statement focus and 'large-scale' hint are sufficient.
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 on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like single-statement tools or other bulk tools. The phrase 'designed for large-scale data analysis' implies bulk usage but provides no explicit comparisons, exclusions, or use cases.
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.