cyber_incidents

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

The description only says 'curated feed,' which hints at a pre-filtered list but does not disclose how the feed behaves, such as pagination, filtering, or any side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden but fails to explain important behavioral traits like authentication, rate limits, or return format.

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 is easy to read and front-loaded with the tool's primary purpose. It contains no fluff, though it is quite sparse. The conciseness is effective, but the brevity contributes to incomplete coverage of other dimensions.

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?

This tool has 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description provides no information about parameters, return values, or additional behavior. The description is far too minimal for an agent to correctly use the tool, making it contextually incomplete.

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?

The description does not mention any parameters. Schema coverage is only 40%, with only limit and cursor having descriptions, leaving ciks, date_to, and date_from undocumented. The description fails to compensate for these gaps, offering no additional meaning for parameter usage.

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 identifies the tool as a curated feed of SEC 8-K Item 1.05 material cybersecurity-incident disclosures, using a specific verb (curated feed) and resource (SEC 8-K Item 1.05). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_filings or get_8k_events by focusing on a specific filing type.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool compared to alternatives such as search_filings or get_8k_events, nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites. The intended context is only implied by the name and description.

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