get_trading_symbols

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the returned data sources, includes the 'legacy' ticker scalar, and explains the default accession behavior. It does not cover errors or authorization, but for a read-only retrieval these are less critical.

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 compact sentences with no filler. The main output is stated first, the selection guidance comes second, and parameter usage follows. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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 retrieval with no output schema, the description covers purpose, selection context, parameter semantics, and the default. The only notable omission is a more detailed return-shape description, but the stated output is reasonably clear.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It fully explains both parameters: 'ticker_or_cik: ticker like NVDA or a CIK' and 'accession: optional 10-K accession; default is the latest 10-K.' This is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 states exactly what the tool returns: 'Every dei:TradingSymbol fact on a 10-K, plus the legacy entity_info ticker scalar.' The phrase 'Use this when you need the common stock ticker versus preferred, notes, or dual-class symbols' further differentiates the intended purpose.

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?

It gives a clear usage condition: use this when you need the common stock ticker versus preferred, notes, or dual-class symbols. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but the stated use case is specific enough to guide selection.

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