search_private_fund_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, how pagination works, whether results are aggregated at the fund level, or what 'tab' refers to in the Form PF context. The description only says 'search', which is minimally transparent.

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 core purpose and scope. Every word contributes value, with no fluff or repetition of schema 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?

This is a complex 8-parameter search tool with no output schema, no annotations, and only 25% schema coverage. The description fails to explain the data source structure (Form PF tabs/metrics), pagination behavior, result format, or any relationships to sibling tools. It is grossly incomplete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 only 25% (only limit and cursor are explained). The description adds the phrase 'per quarter, tab, and metric' which loosely maps to quarter_end_date, tab_name, and metric_key, but does not define these parameters, nor does it explain row_key, min_value, or max_value. This is insufficient given the low schema coverage.

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 uses the specific verb 'Search' and clearly identifies the resource: 'aggregate private-fund statistics from Form PF', further scoped by 'per quarter, tab, and metric'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_filings or search_private_funds, which target different data sets.

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 context (Form PF statistics search) but does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like search_filings or search_fund_holdings, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The 'per quarter, tab, and metric' hint gives some sense of intended use, but no direct comparison to siblings.

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