edgar_institutional_holdings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is clear. The description adds that it searches SEC Form 13F data, but does not detail result format, pagination, or data freshness. With no output schema, more context on output structure would 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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. Examples are included without unnecessary elaboration. No filler 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?

For a simple search tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: what data is searched, how to search (by ticker or manager), and examples. It lacks explicit mention of result structure, but the use cases imply it. Adequate for the complexity.

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 clear descriptions for 'query' and 'limit'. The description reinforces the dual role of 'query' (ticker or manager) but adds minimal new meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's function: tracking 'big money' moves by searching Form 13F filings. It specifies two use cases (finding holdings by manager or ticker) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like edgar_ownership_filings by focusing on institutional holdings.

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?

Explicit usage context is provided: 'Use to find what hedge funds and institutional managers ... are holding or what firms own a specific ticker.' This implies when to use it, though it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like edgar_ownership_filings or edgar_company_filings.

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