get_latest_10q

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: the preview is limited to the first 10,000 characters (cover page and first statements), the preview_is_partial flag signals truncation, and it explains how to page through or jump within the full filing using download_filing_text.

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 front-loaded with the core action and return shape, then structured with Args and Returns sections. It is slightly redundant in places (e.g., 'SHORT preview' followed by the 10,000-character limit and later the Returns list), but every sentence contributes useful information and there is no filler.

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 a single-parameter read-only tool with full annotations and an output schema, the description covers the key behavior an agent needs: what is returned, the preview limit, the partial-preview flag, and how to retrieve more. It omits auth requirements and error behavior, but for this simple, annotated tool the definition is largely complete.

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 burden. It identifies ticker as a 'Stock ticker symbol,' which gives the parameter's meaning, but adds no format examples, case requirements, or exchange conventions. For a single simple parameter this is minimally adequate but not rich.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the latest 10-Q filing') and clarifies it returns a filing link plus a short preview, which implicitly distinguishes it from get_latest_10k and from full-text retrieval via download_filing_text. It does not explicitly name those siblings or contrast with other filing tools, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 explains what to do when preview_is_partial is true (follow read_more with download_filing_text), which is useful continuation guidance. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like get_latest_10k, get_company_filings, or get_filing_content; usage is implied rather than stated.

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