sec-filing-intel

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

The description adds useful behavioral context such as 'no API key' and 'updated within minutes of filing', but fails to disclose limitations like rate limits, error handling, or the maximum number of filings returned (already in schema). Overall, it provides moderate transparency beyond the schema.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by output details and source authority. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, supported inputs, form types, data freshness, and authority. It lacks behavioral details like rate limits and error handling, but still provides a solid contextual foundation for an agent.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minor semantic value by noting ticker case-insensitivity and CIK padding, but does not mention the 'limit' parameter or provide significant new insight beyond the schema descriptions.

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 tool performs 'Real-time SEC EDGAR filing lookup by ticker or CIK' and lists supported form types. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'sec-insider-trades', which may specialize in Form 4 filings, leading to potential overlap.

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 explains when to use the tool (by ticker or CIK) and mentions filtering by form type, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or suggest alternative sibling tools for specialized queries like insider trades.

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