search_sec_filings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the free/no-key nature, lists return fields (filer/company, form type, filing date, provenance URL, record_id), and explains the free search vs. paid full-filing model. This is good behavioral disclosure for a read-only search tool.

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 appropriately sized, front-loads the key value proposition (FREE, no key, search SEC filings), and every sentence adds useful information. No redundant text.

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?

For a one-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, return fields, and pricing. It lacks mention of result limits or pagination, but these are minor gaps for a simple search tool.

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%, but the Args section explains the query parameter with an example ('Berkshire 13F'). This compensates for the schema gap, though it does not cover advanced query syntax or result limiting.

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 searches US SEC filings, listing specific form types (13F, Form 4, 8-K, 10-K, XBRL, EDGAR full text, litigation releases, administrative proceedings). This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from sibling search tools covering other domains.

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?

Provides clear use cases: 'financial research, insider activity monitoring, and issuer due diligence.' Also directs users to call get_record with a record_id to purchase the full filing. Does not explicitly exclude alternative tools, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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