Get Financial Statements

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not contradict. However, beyond stating the data types and periods, it offers no additional behavioral context (e.g., data source, update frequency, pagination), so it adds minimal value beyond the 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?

Two efficient sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action and resource, the second specifies use cases, making it easy to scan.

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 (mentioned in context signals) and the clear description of the financial statements and period types, the description is complete for an agent to understand what the tool returns and when to use it.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description echoes the type parameter's enum values but adds no new meaning for 'ticker' or 'limit' beyond what is in the schema. It does not explain default behavior or constraints 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 income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow data, with explicit period options (annual, quarterly, TTM). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_earnings or get_cash_history, providing a specific verb-resource pair.

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 says 'Use when analyzing revenue, profitability, debt, or cash position,' giving clear context for when to invoke the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools for related but distinct data (e.g., cash history), missing an opportunity for explicit exclusion guidance.

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