yfinance_get_financials

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. Description adds that it returns historical data and the structure of the output (income, balance sheet, cash flow), which is useful but not extensive behavioral context. No contradictions with 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?

Three sentences, each serving a purpose: first defines the action, second describes output, third suggests usage. No unnecessary words or redundancy. Appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 presence of an output schema (so return format is documented elsewhere), the description covers the tool's purpose, output structure, and typical use cases. It is adequate for a simple read-only tool, though it could mention data range or limitations.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (symbol and frequency). Description does not add any new semantics beyond the schema; it only mentions 'historical data' which is implied by the tool's nature. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it fetches financial statements (income, balance sheet, cash flow) with historical data. Verb 'Fetch' and resource 'financial statements' are specific, and the tool is well-distinguished from siblings like price history or holders.

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?

Description says 'Use the data to analyze trends, calculate ratios, or compare periods' which implies usage context but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or when not to use. No exclusions or comparisons to siblings provided.

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