get_financials

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

With no annotations, the description only mentions the period parameter options. It does not disclose data source, rate limits, authentication needs, or any side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the main purpose, but could be more informative without significant length increase.

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 3 parameters (0% schema coverage), no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain parameter details, expected output, or how it differs from similar tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only mentions 'period' in parentheses. It does not describe the ticker or market parameters, their functionality, or allowed values beyond the schema defaults.

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 it returns income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow, and mentions the period parameter options (annual or quarterly). This differentiates from sibling tools like get_key_ratios or dcf_valuation, but does not explicitly state it requires a ticker, which is a required parameter.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_key_ratios or dcf_valuation. The description does not specify prerequisites or context for usage.

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