get_earnings

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the tool's critical behavior: it distinguishes confirmed vs estimated dates and explains the Yahoo window-vs-single-day pitfall. It also details the SEC 8-K Item 2.02 verification method for past quarters, giving the agent deep insight into how results are validated.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then uses short paragraphs to explain the confirmation nuance and SEC verification. No word is wasted; the length is justified by the complexity of the distinction being made.

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?

For a two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what data is returned, how confirmation status works, and the verification methodology. It doesn't need to explain output format since the output schema exists.

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 schema already provides concise descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage). The description adds valuable context about the meaning of 'confirmed' versus 'estimated,' directly enriching the confirm_with_sec parameter's purpose and underlying SEC mechanism.

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 explicitly states the tool returns next earnings date, historical EPS estimates vs actuals, and whether the upcoming date is confirmed or estimated. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_sec_filings by focusing on earnings-specific data with a critical nuance.

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 establishes clear context: use this tool when you need earnings dates and need to know if they are confirmed or estimated. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous, and the SEC confirmation process implies when this tool is needed over generic filing tools.

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