get_earnings_ticker

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get historical earnings data' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify data format, time range, completeness, or any limitations (e.g., rate limits, authentication needs). For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, with every word contributing essential information.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools with overlapping domains, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'historical' means (time range, granularity), what data is returned, or how it differs from other earnings tools, leaving the agent with significant uncertainty.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'ticker' clearly documented as 'Ticker symbol'. The description doesn't add any parameter details beyond what the schema provides, but with complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Get historical earnings data') and resource ('for a ticker'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_earnings_afterhours' or 'get_earnings_premarket', which suggests similar earnings-related functionality but with different temporal scopes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple earnings-related sibling tools (e.g., 'get_earnings_afterhours', 'get_earnings_premarket'), there's no indication of what makes this tool distinct or when it's preferable to use one over another.

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