search_financial_statements

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the resource type and filter dimensions, but does not disclose pagination (though limit/cursor exist in schema), rate limits, data coverage limitations, or result format behavior. Significant behavioral context is missing.

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 verb and resource. Every word contributes meaning, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's scope.

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?

The tool has 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, yet the description only states basic purpose. It omits context about pagination, result structure, or when to use which filters. Given the complexity, the description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior and capabilities.

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 description coverage is 75%, so the schema documents most parameters. The description adds minimal value by summarizing key filters (company, tag, period), but it does not explain undocumented parameters like sic, max_value, or min_value. Since coverage is high but not >80%, 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 clearly states the tool searches 'structured XBRL financial-statement facts' using 'company, tag, and period', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_filings and full_text_search by specifying the XBRL Financial Statement Data Sets resource.

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 implies usage by specifying search dimensions (company, tag, period), but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives, nor provide any when-not guidance. No exclusions or alternative tool references are mentioned.

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