sec_company_financials

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's statement 'Get financial data' aligns with read-only behavior. It adds that data is standardized and extracted from filings, and explains the behavior when metric is omitted (returns summary). No contradiction.

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 with three focused paragraphs: purpose, prerequisite, and common concepts. No redundant sentences; front-loaded with core purpose.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers prerequisites, parameter guidance, and examples. While it could mention return format or pagination, it is fairly complete for the complexity level.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by listing common XBRL concepts and explaining that omitting metric returns a summary of key metrics, going beyond the schema's basic description.

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 the verb 'get', the resource 'financial data from SEC XBRL filings', and specifies data types (revenue, net income, assets). It also mentions the source filings (10-K and 10-Q), distinguishing it from sibling tools like sec_company_search.

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 explicitly states the prerequisite 'Requires CIK number' and directs users to 'Use sec_company_search to look up filings first.' It also lists common XBRL concepts for the metric parameter, providing clear usage context.

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