Compensation filings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds ordering (most recent first) and pagination behavior (auto-collect via max_items). No contradictions; additional context beyond 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?

Two succinct sentences: first explains purpose, second explains pagination. No filler, front-loaded, every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, description conveys purpose, ordering, and pagination. Could hint at return fields but is sufficient for agent to understand tool behavior given openWorldHint.

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 has 100% description coverage. Description adds clarity on pagination (cursor/limit vs max_items, with max_items ignoring cursor), providing meaningful guidance beyond 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 it lists DEF 14A proxy statements, specifies they cover executive compensation and shareholder-vote matters, and orders most recent first. This distinguishes it from siblings like stocks_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?

Explicitly states when to use (list a company's DEF 14A proxy statements) and pagination options. Does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but context with sibling names implies differentiation.

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