list_filings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that returns include a direct EDGAR URL, supports optional form filtering, and a limit parameter with default 15. However, it does not mention ordering, date range, pagination, or behavior when no results are found.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose and output, the second provides usage guidance and parameter hints. Front-loads the key information.

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 simple tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers basic usage and output. However, it lacks details about the query parameter format, result ordering, and the meaning of 'recent', which limits completeness for an AI agent.

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% (no descriptions in schema). The description adds meaning for 'form_types' (example list) and 'limit' (default 15). However, the required 'query' parameter is not explained, leaving ambiguity about what it accepts (e.g., ticker, CIK).

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 lists recent SEC filings with direct EDGAR URLs, specifying verb 'list' and resource 'SEC filings'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'resolve_company' and 'get_company_profile', which serve different purposes.

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 provides explicit use cases: citing sources, finding reports, spotting 8-K events. It mentions optional filtering by form types. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the sibling tools are all different, so confusion is unlikely.

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