get_report_toc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool does NOT use heuristic page-scan; section_tree is built directly from toc.yaml and parsed XML, making page ranges authoritative. It also notes that an optional stock_code improves cache hit rate, adding behavioral insight.

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 well-structured with sections (main description, <strategy>, <critical_rules>, args). It is front-loaded with the key purpose. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description need not explain return values. It adequately covers purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral transparency, and parameter semantics for a simple tool with 2 parameters (1 required) and a well-defined output.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates fully. It explains that rcept_no is a 14-digit DART receipt number from list_dart_filings, and stock_code is an optional 6-digit code that improves cache hit rate. This adds valuable context beyond the schema's title and default.

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 retrieves the complete DART section_tree (Table of Contents) for a parsed report, specifying entry fields (start_page, end_page, local_pages, children). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_report_pages (which reads sections) and list_dart_filings (which lists 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 <strategy> block explicitly says 'Directly invoke this tool to understand the structural layout of the report' and explains that returned section_code values can be passed to get_report_pages. This provides clear guidance on when to use and how it integrates with sibling tools, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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