get_us_filings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the tool returns a list and EDGAR URL, with no mention of side effects, authentication, rate limits, or any behavioral traits beyond the obvious read operation.

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 very concise, with a brief intro, example queries, and an Args section. Every sentence adds value, no filler, and the structure is clear.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description doesn't need to explain return values. It provides enough context for an AI to understand the tool's purpose and parameters, though it could mention prerequisites (e.g., valid US ticker) or limitations.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning: ticker is 'US 티커' and limit is '표시할 공시 건수 (기본 15)', clearly explaining their purpose and default. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 is for US SEC filings (10-K, 10-Q, 8-K) and provides EDGAR URLs, with example queries. It distinguishes from many siblings by focusing on filings, but does not explicitly differentiate from get_disclosure.

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?

Example queries like 'AAPL 10-K' and 'NVDA latest filings' indicate when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternative tools like get_disclosure.

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