sedar_filing_import

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the basic action (import to cache) but does not mention side effects, permissions, whether it overwrites existing entries, rate limits, or any error conditions. This is a significant gap for a tool that modifies local state.

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 focused sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it easy to grasp. However, the brevity sacrifices necessary detail for a tool with 7 parameters, so it is concise but not optimally structured for completeness.

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 7-parameter import tool with no annotations and minimal description, this is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, behavior on repeated imports, or how parameters interrelate. Although an output schema exists, the description alone leaves critical gaps that prevent an agent from using it effectively.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the 7 parameters. It only hints at document_url via 'PDF URL', leaving required fields like company_id, title, filing_date, and optional fields like category, period_end, filing_type completely unaddressed. This fails to guide the agent in constructing valid calls.

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?

Description clearly states the action (import) and resource (one official SEDAR+ generated PDF URL into local cache). This distinguishes it from siblings like filing_read or filings_list. However, it doesn't elaborate on what 'import' entails (download, parse, store), which keeps it from a 5.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over filing_read or filings_list. The implied usage (import a PDF URL into cache) is present but there is no explicit context or direction.

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