get_financial_statement

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

Description discloses output format (CSV with | delimiter) and content scope (three statements). No annotations exist, so the description provides basic behavioral info but lacks details on data recency, authorization, or rate limits.

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?

Description is structured as a docstring with Args and Returns sections, making it easy to parse. Slight redundancy (first sentence vs Returns) prevents a 5, but overall concise.

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 (three parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers input definitions and output description. Adding note on data temporal scope (e.g., real-time vs. delayed) would enhance completeness.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning for all three parameters: symbol context (SET stock), from_year and to_year with examples. This compensates strongly for the schema gap.

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?

Description clearly identifies the tool as retrieving financial statements for SET stocks. However, the first sentence mentions only 'balance sheet' while the Returns section lists all three statements (income, balance, cash flow), creating minor inconsistency.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool or its alternatives. Since there are no sibling tools, the need is reduced, but describing typical use cases would improve clarity.

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