get_balance_sheet

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

No annotations provided, and the description discloses no behavioral traits such as data freshness, read-only nature, rate limits, or pagination. The burden falls on the description, which fails to deliver.

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 extremely concise (one sentence), which is efficient but lacks structure. It misses important details like parameter usage or output expectations, making it minimally adequate.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should explain what the balance sheet includes (e.g., assets, liabilities, equity). It also fails to clarify the freq parameter's effect. The description is incomplete for a tool with no output schema.

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 100%, so the description adds no meaning beyond the schema's definitions for symbol and freq. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents both parameters adequately.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'balance sheet for a stock,' making the purpose unambiguous. However, it does not mention the optional frequency parameter, which could differentiate it from siblings like get_income_statement or get_cashflow.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_income_statement, get_cashflow) or when to include the freq parameter. The description is a single sentence without any context on selection criteria.

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