Get SEC XBRL financials

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: use of as-filed audited figures rather than estimates, handling of restatements (most recently filed value returned), tag differences between filers, and US-only scope. No contradictions 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?

The description is multi-sentence but each sentence earns its place—purpose, use guidance, restatement behavior, tag nuances, and scope. It's well-structured and front-loaded, with no redundant wording.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies necessary return-value context: rows labelled by period, most-recent value on restatements, and tag naming. It covers key limitations (US registrants only) and data provenance. Sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 covers all 4 parameters at 100%, so baseline is 3. The description further explains concept aliases (tried against several us-gaap tags) and the meaning of period/limit in context. It doesn't fully describe every param but adds meaningful context beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool reports financial line items from SEC XBRL filings as time series, with specific examples (revenue, net income, EPS, etc.). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_sec_filings ('want the documents rather than the numbers') and market-data tools.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'prefer this over any market-data tool for fundamentals' and 'Use get_sec_filings instead when you want the documents rather than the numbers.' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use instructions.

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