get_cash_flow_data

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states it provides quarterly cash-flow ratios, implying read-only access, but does not mention any prerequisites, rate limits, or what happens if no data exists. The quarter parameter range is noted but not the output format.

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 very concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. It lists fields efficiently. However, a slight increase in structure (e.g., separating purpose and parameters) would improve scannability without adding bulk.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It explains the output fields but not how to use the inputs or what the response looks like. With sibling tools like get_balance_data and get_profit_data, differentiation would be helpful.

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 0% and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (code, year, quarter). It only mentions quarter's valid range (1..4) but not its meaning or relationship to other parameters. The code and year parameters are completely ignored, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 provides quarterly cash-flow ratios and lists specific fields (e.g., CAToAsset, CFOToOR). It indicates the resource type, distinguishing from siblings like get_balance_data or get_profit_data. However, it lacks an explicit verb phrase like 'Retrieves' and does not confirm the tool returns data for a given stock code.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, if a user needs balance sheet data, get_balance_data would be appropriate, but no such comparison is made. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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