record_actuals

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 the tool modifies data ('settle earlier predictions') and defines key metrics. Missing are side effects like overwrite behavior, triggers, or access requirements.

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 short and front-loaded with the core action. The definitions are clear and relevant. Minor improvement: could group parameter explanations more tightly.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description fails to explain parameter formats or constraints, leaving many parameters unclear. Sibling tools indicate a workflow, but integration guidance is missing. The description is incomplete for a tool with 10 parameters.

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%—the description does not document any of the 10 parameters. It defines related terms (EBITDA, free cash flow) but ignores parameters like earnings_at, fiscal_period, and currency, leaving the agent without critical guidance.

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's purpose: 'Record published actuals and settle earlier predictions for the event.' The verb 'record' and resource 'actuals' are specific. Sibling tools likely include a prediction variant, providing implicit differentiation.

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 definitions for EBITDA and free cash flow, and explains which close price to use based on release time. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., record_prediction) or when not to use it.

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