search_disclosures

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

The annotations already establish read-only, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context: filing-availability-based dates, source links and amount ranges in results, default window, maximum limit, paging guidance, and timestamp format constraints.

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 short and front-loaded: it names the resource, return shape, and key behavioral constraints in a few compact sentences. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

The annotations and output schema reduce the need to explain safety and return values. Still, for a six-parameter search with 0% schema description coverage, the description leaves important input semantics partially unexplained, especially ticker and offset.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the full parameter burden. It explains side values, limit maximum, as_of paging reuse, and timestamp UTC offsets, but it never explains ticker or offset, and available_after is only indirectly touched.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Search House disclosures'. This is clearly distinct from the sibling portfolio tools, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself or state when to choose it over those alternatives.

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?

It provides operational details such as the default 30-day window, a maximum limit of 100, and reuse of as_of when paging. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus get_portfolio or get_portfolio_changes, nor does it describe exclusions.

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