get_financial_statements

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions default values for reference_date and statement_type but lacks details on data source, rate limits, error handling, or response format. Basic transparency but not comprehensive.

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 with a clear docstring format, front-loaded purpose, and parameter list. No unnecessary words; every sentence serves a purpose.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers input parameters including defaults and formats. It provides sufficient context for a financial data retrieval tool with 4 parameters.

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 0%, so the description fully explains all four parameters: ticker example, statement_type codes, report_type options, and reference_date format. This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 'Get raw CVM financial statements' with specific types (income, balance sheet, cash flow). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_dividends' and 'get_fundamentals' by focusing on financial statements.

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 what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'get_fundamentals' or 'screen_stocks'. No when-not or context for selecting this tool over others.

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