Get Insider Positions

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

The description details the dual-mode behavior (issuer vs insider) and the fallback logic, complementing the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds value beyond the annotation by explaining the lookupMode field and derivation from Form 4.

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 concise (5 sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy.

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 (1 parameter, output schema present, readOnlyHint annotation), the description covers all necessary aspects: behavior, parameter usage, return field, and data source.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already describes the CIK parameter thoroughly. The description adds further context on the dual interpretation and fallback, providing added value.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'current open insider positions' for a CIK. It explicitly distinguishes between issuer and insider CIK modes, which differentiates it from sibling tools like get_insider_transactions.

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 clear context on when to use the tool (e.g., when you have a CIK and need open positions, with dual interpretation based on CIK type). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives.

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