sec_company_search

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

With no annotations, the description transparently states the data source (official company_tickers map), output fields (CIK, ticker, name), and that it requires no credentials. It does not cover rate limits or error behavior, but for a simple lookup, this is sufficient.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: first states the core purpose, second adds source and credential-free nature. No unnecessary words, well front-loaded.

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 simple lookup tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential: input format (ticker or name), output fields, data source, and access. Very slightly lacking in return format details, but largely complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the tool uses an 'official company_tickers map' and outputs specific fields, beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It clarifies the purpose of the query parameter.

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 resolves a ticker or company name to EDGAR companies, specifying output includes CIK, ticker, and name. It distinguishes itself from sibling SEC tools (e.g., sec_company_intelligence, sec_company_submissions) by focusing solely on basic mapping.

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 mentions 'credential-free public SEC data,' implying no authentication is needed, but does not explicitly compare or contrast with sibling tools like sec_full_text_search or sec_company_intelligence. It lacks guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives.

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