searchInsiderTradesByReportingName

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds vague behavioral context ('Track trading activities') but does not clarify search behavior (e.g., fuzzy matching, result limits, or response structure).

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, no redundancy, and placed upfront. Could be slightly more concise but is effective.

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 input (one param) and no output schema, the description covers the purpose but lacks detail on usage context (e.g., when to use this vs. other insider trade tools) and does not mention pagination or result format.

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 single parameter 'name' has a clear description in the schema ('Reporting person's name to search for'), and the overall description mentions 'reporting name' but adds no additional meaning. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches for insider trading activity by reporting name, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'searchInsiderTrades' which may search by other criteria.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites or contrast with similar tools (e.g., searchInsiderTrades, getLatestInsiderTrading).

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