get_income_statement

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

With no annotations provided and no output schema detail referenced, the description provides no behavioral context beyond the basic operation. It does not disclose return format, data granularity, or any quirks about how the income statement is retrieved.

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 appropriately short and front-loaded, with a clear purpose statement followed by a concise parameter list. Every sentence adds value and there is 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?

The tool is simple and the output schema exists, which covers return values. However, the description lacks usage context such as when to prefer this over other financial statements, and does not mention whether data is historical, trailing, or forecast. This leaves minor but material gaps.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully documents both parameters: ticker with an example ('AAPL') and period with allowed values ('annual' or 'quarterly'). This adds significant meaning 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 the tool's purpose: 'Get income statement data' and lists specific metrics (revenue, gross profit, EBITDA, net income, EPS). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_balance_sheet and get_cash_flow.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or comparative context with sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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