Retrieve recent SEC filings like 10-K, 10-Q, and 8-K for a stock ticker, returning filing types and dates for fundamental analysis.
Get recent SEC filings (10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, etc.).
Args: ticker: Stock ticker symbol
Returns: Recent SEC filings with types and dates
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ticker | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, open-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that: 'recent' implies a recency window or result limit but never defines it, and no auth, rate-limit, or pagination behavior is disclosed.
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 payload is short and the purpose is front-loaded in the first line. The Args/Returns blocks are largely boilerplate that restate the schema and output schema, but they are brief and do not bloat the definition.
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?
Because an output schema exists, the Returns block is redundant and the definition need not explain return values. However, for a single-ticker filings tool the 'recent' scope is left undefined and there is no guidance on coverage limits, leaving a small but real gap.
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?
There is only one parameter and schema description coverage is 0%. The description's 'ticker: Stock ticker symbol' supplies minimal meaning — it labels the parameter but adds no format, exchange, or case-sensitivity detail beyond the property name itself.
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 (Get) and resource (recent SEC filings) and enumerates examples of filing types (10-K, 10-Q, 8-K), which distinguishes it from other company-data siblings. It does not explicitly differentiate from the many other 'get_*' tools, but the resource 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 says nothing about when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_stock_news, get_company_info) or any prerequisites. No exclusions or contextual triggers are given; usage must be inferred entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.