Get SEC filings

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context by explaining the union of filing types, the output fields (items, count/total, accession, formType, filedDate, category, label), and the 'recent' scope. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 dense but well-structured, starting with the core purpose, then listing filing types, describing output fields, and ending with a use case. Every sentence contributes useful information, though the enumeration of filing types makes it slightly longer than strictly necessary.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by specifying the item structure and field names. It covers the main scenarios and the union scope thoroughly. Minor details like pagination or ordering are not mentioned, but for a list-fetching tool with a limit parameter, this is sufficiently complete.

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 schema already documents two of three parameters (days, limit) with default/max values, and ticker is self-evident. The description adds little parameter-specific detail beyond saying 'recent' which is already implied by the days parameter. With schema coverage at 67%, the description provides marginal added 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 gets recent SEC filings for a ticker, enumerates the specific filing types covered (8-K, NT-10K/Q, 13D/13G, etc.), and describes the output structure. This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which cover other data domains like social trends, quotes, and analytics.

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 gives a clear use case: 'Use to read the actual regulatory record behind a thesis.' It provides clear context for when to use the tool, but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. Since no other sibling tool covers SEC filings, the unique niche is implied, making the guidance effective.

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