getIPOProspectuses

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by listing specific data contents (public offering prices, SEC links). However, it does not disclose pagination, date range boundaries, or data freshness. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, which the description does not contradict.

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 three sentences with no redundant content. It front-loads the purpose and includes specific examples and value-add (SEC links). Could be slightly tighter but is 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?

Given the simple parameter set (2 optional dates) and no output schema, the description covers the data source and types. However, it lacks details like output format, behavior when dates are omitted, and whether the response is paginated. It is adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions ('Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)' and 'End date (YYYY-MM-DD)'). The description doesn't add any extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 specifies the resource ('IPO prospectuses') and key data points (public offering prices, discounts, etc.), making the purpose clear. However, it uses the vague verb 'Access' instead of a more precise action like 'List' or 'Retrieve'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., getIPOCalendar, getIPODisclosures). It neither states when to use nor when not to use, leaving the agent without decision context.

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