finance.company-facts

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

The description lists the return content (metrics with period details) but does not explicitly state read-only behavior or error handling (e.g., invalid ticker). Since no annotations are provided, more transparency would be beneficial.

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 a single paragraph of three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. It is efficient but could be slightly improved with bullet points for clarity, though not necessary.

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 covers the metrics returned and period details, but without an output schema, it lacks details on the response structure (e.g., JSON format). It also does not specify behavior for missing tickers or edge cases.

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 input schema already has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description lists the same metric keys, adding little new information beyond reinforcing the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool returns curated XBRL financial metrics for a US public company by stock ticker, listing specific metrics. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like finance.company-profile (company overview) and finance.sec-filings (raw filings).

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?

The description implies usage for quick access to key financial metrics but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like finance.sec-filings or finance.company-profile. No guidance on when not to use it.

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