Search new startup funding rounds (SEC Form D)

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: default filtering of pooled funds/amendments, execution on the Apify Actor tacps126/startup-funding on the user's account, per-filing cost (~$0.005) and a $0.5 per-call spend cap. The cost/rate disclosure is exactly the kind of trait annotations cannot express.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource definition, then filters, then use cases, then cost/execution notes. The long field enumeration is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists, but the rest is tight and each clause carries information.

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 an 8-parameter tool with nested objects and an output schema, the description covers origin, defaults, cost and use cases well. Minor gaps remain around what extra_input can override and typical result volume beyond the parenthetical estimate, but nothing that would cause a mis-call.

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 every parameter is already documented. The description adds a summary ('filter by state, industry, amount and company age') but leaves query, max_items, posted_within_days and extra_input untouched, so it does not meaningfully enrich semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('New private fundraises from SEC Form D filings') and enumerates the fields returned, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like find_companies or search_grants. The scope (new Form D filings only) is explicit.

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?

Gives clear use contexts ('sales prospecting, investor research and deal flow') and states default exclusions (pooled investment funds and amendments left out), which shapes when the tool is appropriate. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions.

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