fq_get_financial_statements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no extra behavioral context, but also does not contradict annotations.

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?

Very short (7 words) but at the expense of clarity. The cryptic 'BCTC:' prefix and lack of parameter context reduce effectiveness despite conciseness.

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?

With 5 parameters and 0% schema coverage, the description is insufficient. It only addresses one parameter partially and omits usage patterns, output behavior, and parameter interactions. The presence of an output schema slightly mitigates completeness but does not compensate for missing parameter documentation.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description lists possible values for the 'statement' parameter (income_statement, balance_sheet, cashflow, full, note), which is helpful. However, it does not explain other parameters like years, audited, tickers, quarters, leaving significant gaps.

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 starts with an acronym 'BCTC:' which is not explained, then lists statement types. It fails to clearly state that the tool retrieves financial statements for given tickers. The purpose is only vaguely inferred from the tool name.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like fq_get_financial_ratios or fq_get_equity_snapshot. No context about prerequisites or suitable use cases.

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