earnings_calendar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does add useful context about the return content (BMO/AMC, EPS estimates), but it does not disclose output structure, edge cases, or any side effects. This is adequate but has gaps.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose and an 'Args' block for the parameter. It is front-loaded and every word 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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description is reasonably complete. It states what data is returned and how to pass the parameter. Minor gaps exist, such as defining 'upcoming' and the exact output shape, but these are not critical.

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 schema provides only a title and type for 'symbols', so the description compensates fully by explaining the format (single or comma-separated list) and giving concrete examples. This is exactly what the agent needs to correctly populate the parameter.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('upcoming earnings dates') with additional details about timing (BMO/AMC) and EPS estimates. It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which focus on earnings calendars.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool (to retrieve upcoming earnings dates and estimates) and provides a parameter example. While it doesn't explicitly discuss alternatives, no direct sibling alternative exists, so the context is sufficient.

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