get_fundamentals_statements

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions 'historical' and statement types but does not disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or response format. Partial coverage but insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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?

Single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. No wasted words, but could benefit from additional context without becoming verbose.

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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is relatively complete in stating the data fetched. However, it does not explain parameter usage patterns (e.g., date vs year/quarter) or output structure. Missing output schema means description should provide more guidance on what is returned.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond listing the statement types. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as description provides marginal additional value.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Fetches', resource 'historical fundamental statement data', and specifies the types (Balance Sheet, Income Statement, Cash Flow, Overview). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_fundamentals_daily_metrics which focus on daily metrics rather than statements.

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?

Description implies usage for fundamental statements but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid it. No mention of alternatives like get_fundamentals_meta or get_fundamentals_definitions for metadata or definitions. Lacks context on when to choose this over siblings.

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