Get Corporate Events

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable context about the return structure (SEC item number, human-readable label, category, significance level) and event coverage, going beyond what annotations provide.

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 two concise sentences: the first states purpose and coverage, the second lists output fields. It is front-loaded with the main verb and resource, with no unnecessary 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?

There is no output schema, but the description explains what each event includes (SEC item number, label, category, significance). It also lists many event types. The term 'recent' is vague, but the limit parameter and example coverage make the tool understandable for a typical use case.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The schema fully documents cik, limit, and significance, including the meaning of each significance level. The description adds no extra parameter details 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 it retrieves recent 8-K corporate events for a company, with a specific verb and resource. It lists concrete event types (M&A, earnings, leadership changes, etc.), which differentiates it from sibling tools that fetch filings or 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 implies usage for getting corporate events but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_company_filings or search_filings. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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