get_company_tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only describes parameters without mentioning read-only nature, rate limits, authentication requirements, or potential side effects. The description is insufficient for a non-trivial 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 brief and to the point, with a clear purpose followed by structured argument descriptions. No extraneous words or redundant information; every sentence adds value.

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 presence of an output schema (not needing output description) and three parameters, the description covers the tool's purpose and parameter semantics well. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency, leaving some gaps for an agent to make fully informed decisions.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds significant meaning: it lists allowed tab values, explains mode default ('consolidated' or 'standalone'), and gives an example for symbol. This goes beyond the bare schema, though enum constraints are not formally enforced in the schema.

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 retrieves a specific financial data tab for a company. It uses the verb 'Get' and specifies the resource type (financial data tab) and scope (company). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_company (overview) and get_company_raw (raw data), which serve different purposes.

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 implies usage when a specific tab or mode is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or conditions are provided, leaving the agent to infer context from sibling tool names.

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