stock_filings

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It describes a read operation (get filings) but does not disclose any potential side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or scope limitations (e.g., 'recent' undefined). Minimal behavioral context.

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 concise sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with the core purpose, then details about return fields. 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?

No output schema is provided, but description adequately informs the agent about return types (filing type, date, document links). For a simple read tool with one required parameter, this is sufficiently complete.

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% and the description of the 'query' parameter matches the schema ('Company name or ticker'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it gets recent SEC filings, lists specific types (10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, S-1), and specifies return fields. This distinguishes it from siblings like stock_financials (financial data) or stock_history (historical prices).

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 use for SEC filings of US public companies but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor mentions alternatives. Adequate but lacks exclusions or context differentiation.

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