Search disclosures

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds significant behavioral context: caching until next 15:00 Manila close, pagination specifics (total/pages/has_more), and the fact that a query may serve stale data if already cached. No contradiction 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?

The description is appropriately sized, uses bullet points for clarity, and every sentence adds value. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, then expands into usage and caching details without redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (5 optional parameters, pagination, caching, output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, how to paginate, parameter semantics, and behavioral nuances. The output schema exists and the description complements it without needing to explain return values in depth.

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%, so the description fully compensates by explaining all five parameters: symbol (company's full history), start_date/end_date (ISO YYYY-MM-DD, date range), template (free-text filter), and page (implicitly via 'request the next page directly'). Every parameter is semantically clarified.

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 PSE company disclosures (announcements, material information, notices), specifies it returns disclosure metadata, and distinguishes it from get_disclosure by noting edge_no is for attachment links. This is a specific verb+resource+scope with clear differentiation from siblings.

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 detailed usage patterns: symbol-only, date range, template filter, defaults when neither symbol nor dates are supplied, pagination approach (50 results per page, next page directly), and caching behavior. It also implies alternatives (get_disclosure for attachments) and clarifies when results appear relative to the Manila close.

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