sec_company_submissions

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the read-only nature, returned fields, and authentication-free access. It does not mention rate limits or pagination, but for a simple list endpoint, it is sufficiently transparent.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by return fields and usage hints. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Given six parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, and identification. It lacks default limit info and pagination details but is adequate for agent decision-making and invocation.

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% with all parameters described. The description adds value by emphasizing that cik or ticker is needed (implied mutual exclusivity) and that form/date parameters are for filtering, enhancing understanding 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 'List a company's EDGAR filings' with specific return fields (form, dates, URL) and company profile fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sec_filing (single filing) and sec_company_search (company lookup) by targeting a company's submissions list.

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?

Provides clear usage: 'Provide cik or ticker' and mentions filtering by form type and date range via parameters. It notes 'Credential-free public SEC data' but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparisons with siblings for specific use cases.

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