get_recent_preliminary_statements

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions output (links to PDF and issuer page) but fails to state read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the obvious purpose.

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 two sentences, well-structured, defines acronym POS, and efficiently conveys purpose and output. Every sentence earns its place 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 no output schema and zero annotations, the description adequately explains that results are rows linking to PDFs and issuer pages. However, it could benefit from specifying ordering or date range to be fully complete, but the current level is sufficient for a simple query tool.

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 50% (only issuer_contains has a description), but the tool description does not mention or clarify the parameters at all. It adds no value over the schema, leaving the agent to infer parameter usage from the schema alone. For 50% coverage, the description should compensate.

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 'Recent Preliminary Official Statements (POS)' — pre-pricing documents filed before a deal comes to market. It specifies they are the leading edge of the new-issue pipeline, distinguishing it from siblings like get_recent_official_statements (final documents).

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 implies usage for pre-pricing documents but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as get_recent_official_statements or get_new_issue_calendar. The context suggests when to use, but no direct when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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