getCompanyProfileByCIK

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds minor context about the API source and data scope but does not supplement notable behavioral traits (e.g., authentication, rate limits, response size).

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action and resource. Mentions the API source, which is slightly redundant but not overly verbose. Efficient overall.

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?

No output schema exists, so description should compensate. It lists some fields (stock price, market cap, industry) but is vague ('much more') and does not specify return format or structure. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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% for the single parameter, with a minimal description 'CIK number'. The description does not add extra meaning, format constraints, or examples beyond the schema, so 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 retrieves company profile data by CIK, and mentions specific data fields (stock price, market cap, industry). It uniquely identifies the tool's resource (CIK) and differentiates from siblings like getCompanyProfile (by symbol).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., getCompanyProfile for symbol-based lookup). Agents are not told the context for preferring CIK over other identifiers.

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