SEC 8-K material events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says nothing about return volume, ordering, rate limits, or what happens when no ticker is supplied (all-company sweep vs. empty), leaving key behavioral traits undisclosed for a tool whose default query type can materially change result size.

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?

One well-formed sentence with the resource front-loaded and the two usage modes stated compactly. No filler, though the parenthetical item list is slightly long relative to the rest.

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 a 3-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the resource and the ticker/no-ticker split but omits the days parameter's meaning and default behavior, and gives no indication of result shape or volume. Adequate but with a clear gap around the unspecified default query scope.

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 67% – ticker and item are documented in the schema, days is not. The description usefully expands the meaning of item codes (2.02 earnings, 5.02 officer changes, 1.01 agreements), adding value beyond the schema's bare "e.g. 2.02", but the days window remains undefined in both places.

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 resource (8-K current reports) and what it carries (item numbers), and clarifies the two access modes: by ticker or latest across companies. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings, though none of the listed siblings cover SEC filings, so confusion risk is low.

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?

"For a ticker or the latest across companies" implies the two usage modes and hints that the ticker parameter is optional, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of how the days window interacts with these modes, and no named alternative.

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