List filings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds meaningful behavioral details like ordering (most recent first), pagination options (cursor/limit or auto-collect via max_items), and return content (filing metadata and accession numbers). No contradictions.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by specifics. Every sentence contributes useful information without 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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), the description covers all necessary context: purpose, filtering, pagination, return type, and integration with sibling tools. It is comprehensive for a listing tool.

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 100% with individual parameter descriptions. The description adds context by explaining how the parameters relate to filtering (form type, date range) and pagination (cursor, limit, max_items). This goes beyond the schema alone.

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 lists a company's SEC EDGAR filings with ordering and filtering options. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like stocks_filing, stocks_sections, and stocks_section by explaining how the output is used downstream.

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 explains the tool's functionality and how to use its output with other tools (e.g., pass accession to stocks_filing). It provides implicit usage context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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