stock_financials

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It states it returns financial data, implying a read operation, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, data freshness, or if it's limited to specific exchanges. The lack of annotations and behavioral details makes it less transparent, but not contradictory.

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?

Single sentence listing multiple return fields without jargon. No filler or redundancy. Efficiently conveys purpose and output.

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 one parameter, the description covers the input well. However, it does not specify temporal range (e.g., latest fiscal year), data format, or how to handle multiple reporting periods. The output schema is missing, but the description lists fields. For a financial data tool, more context on data scope would be helpful.

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 already describes the query parameter with examples. Description adds context: the data source (SEC EDGAR) and that it's for US public companies, which helps avoid misuse with non-US companies. This adds value beyond schema.

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?

Clear verb 'Get financial data' specifies the action and resource 'US public company from SEC EDGAR'. Lists specific financial metrics, distinguishing it from sibling tools like stock_filings (filings) and stock_compare (comparisons).

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?

No guidance on when to use versus siblings like stock_filings or stock_history. No mention of prerequisites or limitations (e.g., only recent data). The description simply states what it does without usage context.

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