get_filings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, indicating safe, read-only behavior. The description adds no further behavioral traits beyond stating the data type (filings/announcements), so it does not significantly enhance transparency beyond 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 concise with a title, strategy, example, and parameter list. Every element adds value: the strategy guides usage, the example illustrates invocation, and parameter definitions are brief yet informative. No redundant content.

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 simplicity (two parameters, one required) and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the tool does, how to use it, and what parameters are needed. The strategy and example complete the picture for an agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by briefly defining both parameters: 'symbol: Security symbol' and 'count: Number of filings (default 20)'. Though minimal, it provides essential meaning missing from the schema, including a default value via the example.

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 'Get company filings/announcements (公告)', specifying both the action and resource. The strategy further distinguishes it as for 'official company announcements', differentiating it from sibling news tools like get_news or get_news_search.

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 strategy explicitly says 'Directly invoke with symbol for official company announcements', providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternatives, leaving a slight gap.

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