Filing sections

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; description adds behavioral detail about potential size-capping ('watch for the _truncated note') and documents that each section includes its code and full text. No contradiction with 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 efficient sentences that front-load the core action and purpose. Every sentence adds value with no redundant or filler content.

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 fetches multiple sections, description adequately covers return content (section code and full text) and potential truncation. No output schema exists but description provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke and interpret results.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage on both parameters (ticker, accession) with clear descriptions. The description adds context by linking accession to stocks_filings and reaffirming parameters are used to identify the filing.

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?

Clearly states it fetches every extracted narrative section of one SEC filing at once, listing examples like business, risk-factors, mda, and legal-proceedings. Distinguishes itself from sibling stocks_section by noting it returns all sections versus single section.

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 says 'Use this to pull a whole filing's readable text; when you only need one section, stocks_section returns far less.' Also instructs to get accession numbers from stocks_filings, providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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