show_earnings

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

The description discloses the dual behavior (with/without ticker) but lacks details on authentication needs, rate limits, data freshness, or error handling. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden; it is adequate but not thorough.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 earnings calendar tool with no output schema, the description covers the main usage modes. It could be improved by hinting at return format or error cases, but overall it is sufficient for the complexity level.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond the schema. Per guidelines, baseline 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 it fetches earnings calendar and distinguishes two modes: without ticker for upcoming earnings for all held tickers, and with ticker for history plus upcoming. This differentiates it from sibling tools like show_financials or show_valuation.

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 implicitly guides usage by describing the two modes (omit ticker for portfolio overview, include ticker for specific company data). It does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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