earnings_report

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get', implying read-only, but does not clarify return format, data availability, rate limits, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool that might have premium data restrictions or complex output.

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 that front-loads the main action. There is no unnecessary information. It is appropriately sized for a simple fetch tool, though it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

For a tool with three well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal but adequate for a simple fetch. However, it lacks context on what the earnings report contains (e.g., revenue, EPS, etc.) and whether it returns only one report or a list. Given the availability of related tools like earnings_history, this could be more explicit.

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 100% with each parameter described (ticker, year, quarter). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, such as required format for quarter (e.g., 'Q1' vs '1') or year range. Since the schema already documents all parameters, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('earnings report') with specific qualifiers (year and quarter). It implies the ticker from the schema. While it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools, it is distinguishable from earnings_history, earnings_trend, etc. by focusing on a single report for a specific period.

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 like earnings_history or earnings_trend. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing a valid ticker, or scenarios where this tool is preferred (e.g., fetching a single quarter's report vs. a history).

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