xbrl_edgar_filing_index

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds that the tool returns a list of documents with types, sizes, and URLs, which is useful but does not cover error scenarios or output format details beyond a generic 'JSON' mention.

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 short but includes an 'Args:' and 'Returns:' section that are not well structured or formatted. While concise, it could be more organized and front-loaded with the most critical information.

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 purpose (listing document index) and the presence of annotations but no output schema, the description lacks detail on the return structure, pagination, or limitations. It is not fully complete for an agent to confidently invoke without prior knowledge.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage (only minimal field descriptions). The description merely restates 'CIK and accession number' without providing format details, examples, or usage notes, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of explanation.

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 retrieves the full index of documents within a specific SEC filing, listing exhibits, schemas, instances, and other documents with types, sizes, and URLs. It uses a specific verb and resource, differentiating from siblings like xbrl_get_exhibits and xbrl_list_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?

The description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it. It only implies that a valid CIK and accession number are needed.

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