getKeyMetrics

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and open-world traits. The description adds context about the API source and example metrics, but does not disclose behavioral details like rate limits, data freshness, or pagination. It complements annotations without adding significant new behavioral transparency.

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 purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence earns its place, making it highly concise.

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 absence of an output schema and the presence of sibling tools like getKeyMetricsTTM, the description is somewhat incomplete. It lists example metrics but does not clarify the scope (e.g., period parameter effect) or distinguish from similar tools. Annotations help but the description could be richer.

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 has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the schema itself provides parameter semantics. The description does not elaborate on parameters beyond the high-level purpose, hence it adds no additional value beyond what the schema already offers.

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 accesses essential financial metrics (revenue, net income, P/E ratio) for a company, using clear verbs like 'access' and 'evaluate'. However, it does not distinguish from siblings like getKeyMetricsTTM, which could cause confusion.

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 implies usage for performance assessment and competitor comparison, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., getKeyMetricsTTM, getRatios) and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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