get_financial_statements

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the data source (SEC filings), return components (statements, ratios, period info, links), and includes a parameter description for limit. It does not mention destructive actions or auth, but as a read-only data retrieval tool, this is adequate. Slightly more detail on response structure could improve transparency.

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 well-structured with headings and bullet points, making key information easy to scan. It is somewhat verbose but every section adds value. Front-loads the main purpose effectively.

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?

The description is comprehensive, covering all financial statements and ratios, use cases, and return components. Without an output schema, it sufficiently explains what the tool returns. Given the complexity of financial data, it is complete.

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% with each parameter described. The description adds value by explaining defaults (e.g., limit default depends on periodType) and providing context for includeRatios and periodType use cases, going beyond the schema alone.

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 it accesses financial statements from SEC filings, listing specific statements and ratios. It distinguishes from siblings like get_historical_data (price history) or get_options_chain (options data) by focusing on fundamental financial data.

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 provides clear use case examples (e.g., 'Get Apple's annual financial statements') and mentions available data types. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool in favor of alternatives, though the sibling list and context make it implicit.

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