Access detailed revenue breakdowns by geographic region with the Revenue Geographic Segments API. Analyze how different regions contribute to a company’s total revenue and identify key markets for growth.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| period | No | Period type (annual or quarter) | |
| symbol | Yes | Stock symbol | |
| structure | No | Response structure |
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 must disclose behavior on its own. It only states the high-level operation without detailing response structure, data limitations, authentication requirements, or side effects. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what the tool name implies.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no filler. It efficiently communicates purpose and use case without unnecessary text.
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?
The description gives a clear purpose but, without an output schema, the agent isn't told what fields to expect in the response. It also doesn't mention period/structure handling or data availability constraints. For a basic data-fetching tool, it provides enough to initiate a call, but lacks details for fully anticipating the output.
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?
All three parameters are fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to explain parameter details. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.
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's function with a specific verb ('Access') and resource ('revenue breakdowns by geographic region'). It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool getRevenueProductSegmentation by explicitly mentioning 'geographic region'.
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 provides clear context and a defined use case ('Analyze how different regions contribute to a company’s total revenue and identify key markets for growth'). However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, such as the product-based sibling.
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.