track_sec_filings

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

No annotations are provided, and the description is extremely brief. It does not disclose whether the tool returns filing details, links, summaries, or any limitations. The agent has no information about mutation, rate limits, or data freshness.

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 only two sentences, front-loading the purpose. It is concise but could convey more useful information in the same space, such as output details.

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?

With one required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits what the user will receive (e.g., filing dates, links) and any constraints of the Starter tier.

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?

There is only one parameter 'ticker' with a schema description giving examples. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 'SEC filings for listed crypto companies' clearly states the domain and resource (SEC filings of crypto companies). The verb 'track' is implied by the tool name, and 'Starter tier' hints at subscription level. However, it does not differentiate from sibling track tools like track_pumpfun or track_bonkfun, which target different data types.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools include many data retrieval tools, but the description provides no context for choosing this tool over, e.g., get_article or get_entity.

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