screener_get_quarterly_results

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe, idempotent read. The description does not add any behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, such as rate limits or authorization needs.

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 a single sentence with 10 words, containing only essential information. It is front-loaded and does not waste words.

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 that an output schema exists and annotations cover behavioral aspects, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details about data coverage (e.g., how many quarters), update frequency, or any nuances that might affect agent decisions. It is functional but not comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 0%, requiring the description to compensate. However, the description only mentions the content of the result (sales, expenses, profit) and does not explain any of the three parameters (symbol, consolidated, response_format). Neither their purpose nor their effect is clarified.

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 that the tool returns quarterly sales, expenses, operating profit, and net profit as a table. It specifies the resource (quarterly financial data) and the action (retrieval), but does not differentiate this tool from siblings like profit_loss or balance_sheet.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, data currency, or appropriate contexts. The description only states what it returns, not when it should be chosen over sibling tools.

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