Financial Report Snapshot

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by detailing the output fields (report_desc, fo_*, fr_*). Annotations declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, which the description does not contradict. The disclosure of specific data elements helps the agent understand the tool's behavior.

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 concise, packing relevant output fields into a single sentence. It front-loads the main purpose. However, the structure could be clearer by separating output fields from report types.

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, the description partially compensates by listing output fields. However, it lacks explanation of what report_desc contains (e.g., a textual summary of what?) and does not clarify the format of comparisons. For a 4-parameter tool with no output schema, more detail would be beneficial.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well-documented. The description briefly repeats the report types (qf/saf/af) but adds no new semantic context for other parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 it retrieves a financial report snapshot with specific fields (text summary, revenue, EBIT, EPS with comparisons, financial ratios). It identifies the resource and action, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like financial_report or financial_statement.

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 such as financial_report or financial_statement. The description does not provide context for appropriate usage or exclusions.

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