sec_filings_recent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds useful context by noting the data source is official SEC data and that results are 'recent', but it does not disclose output shape, rate limits, authentication requirements, or behavior when neither ticker nor CIK is provided.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase adds information: action, resource, recency, lookup method, and data source.

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 annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage, this one-liner is not complete enough for confident invocation. It leaves unresolved whether ticker/CIK is mandatory, what 'recent' means, and what fields or format the returned filings will have.

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 clarifies that ticker and CIK are the lookup identifiers, but it does not explain their expected formats, whether at least one is required, or anything about the 'limit' parameter, which is entirely undocumented.

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 names a specific verb ('Fetch'), a precise resource ('recent SEC EDGAR filings'), and the two lookup keys ('ticker or CIK'). The 'official SEC data' qualifier clearly separates it from the Avanza, TradingView, FMP, and Polygon siblings, none of which offer SEC EDGAR filings.

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 implies the primary use case: retrieve recent SEC filings when you have a ticker or CIK. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it, nor does it name any alternative tools or conditions that would favor a sibling.

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