sec_company_submissions

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

Describes the basic behavior (returns recent filings, filtering by form and date) and notes no authentication needed. But with no annotations, the description lacks details on data freshness, pagination, error handling, or what 'recent' means. The schema shows no required params, but the description suggests cik/ticker are needed, which is a helpful but incomplete transparency.

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 concise sentences that front-load the main action and then provide filtering and identifier requirements. No unnecessary words, highly efficient.

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 no output schema, the description only hints at the return fields (form, dates, URL) but does not fully describe the response structure. It also omits the default limit (50) and the maximum (500) mentioned in the schema. For a list tool with five optional parameters and no annotations, the description is adequate but not 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?

All six parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal extra meaning. It mentions filtering by form type and date range, which corresponds to form, from, and to parameters, but does not elaborate beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

Clearly states that the tool lists a company's EDGAR filings, including form, dates, and primary document URL, and can filter by form type and date range. While it mentions providing cik or ticker, it does not explicitly distinguish from closely related siblings like sec_company_search or sec_filing, missing some differentiation.

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?

Implies that at least one of cik or ticker should be provided, and notes that the data is credential-free. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like sec_company_search or sec_filing, nor does it clarify behavior if no parameters are provided.

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