get_fins_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is safe. The description adds that it supports Japanese GAAP and IFRS and returns detailed statements. No contradictions, but could further clarify data volume or pagination.

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 well-structured with a bold usage note, a summary paragraph, and an args list. It is concise without unnecessary repetition, and 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 tool's simplicity (2 optional params, no enums) and the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and its parameters. No gaps identified.

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%, but the description provides detailed param info: code format (5 digits, 4-digit for ordinary shares) and date format (YYYY-MM-DD) with the constraint that at least one must be specified. This adds significant meaning beyond 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 it retrieves detailed financial statement line items (BS, PL, CF). It distinguishes from sibling tool get_fins_summary by noting that get_fins_summary is for common metrics and is cached.

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 explicitly says 'Use only when individual BS/PL/CF line items are needed' and recommends the alternative get_fins_summary for common metrics. It also notes the Premium plan requirement.

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