sec_company_search

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

The description confirms it is a read-only lookup (consistent with readOnlyHint annotation) and details the return fields: company name, tickers, SIC code, state, and recent filings list. It adds behavioral context beyond 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?

The description is concise and well-structured: purpose stated first, followed by common examples, and a cross-reference for finding CIK. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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 simple input schema and no output schema, the description adequately lists return fields and provides usage context. It also references the sibling tool for CIK discovery, making it self-contained for an agent.

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 single parameter 'cik' is described with format ('10-digit CIK number'), examples ('0000320193' for Apple), and clarification that leading zeros are optional. Schema coverage is 100% and examples add practical value.

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 tool looks up a company on SEC EDGAR by CIK number, specifying the action, resource, and input. It distinguishes itself from the sibling sec_filing_search, which is for finding CIK by 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?

The description explicitly instructs how to find a CIK when unknown ('To find CIK: search by company name using sec_filing_search'), and provides common CIK examples for quick reference. This gives clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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