fmp_profile

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 mktCap may be stale (up to 1 week from cache) and that no timestamp is included. This is transparent about data freshness and potential misleading values.

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 concise with two focused paragraphs. The first states purpose and return fields; the second addresses data freshness and provides an alternative. No redundant or unnecessary sentences.

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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to detail return values. It covers the main behavioral traits (data freshness, snapshot nature) and provides an alternative for historical data. Complete for a profile-lookup tool.

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 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds that ticker is an alias for symbol, which is already implied by the schema. No additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 gets 'detailed company profile information' and lists specific fields (sector, industry, description, CEO, employees, website, key financial metrics). It distinguishes from siblings by noting an alternative for historical market cap.

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 explicitly gives when-to-use guidance: for historical period-aligned market cap, use fmp_fetch instead. It also warns about potential staleness of mktCap, helping the agent decide if this tool is appropriate.

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