get_korean_stock_fundamentals
Get Korean stock fundamentals and valuation ratios.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| corp | No | ||
| year | No | ||
| metric | No | ||
| ticker | No | ||
| quarter | No |
kdata-gate
TDQS
C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what data format is returned. The description only states the action, omitting important behavioral context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness3/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded, but it lacks structure and additional informative content. It could be improved without much added length.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what fundamentals are returned, how parameters interact, or any usage context. The tool's complexity is not addressed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention any parameter details (e.g., how to specify the stock via corp, ticker, year, quarter, metric). The five parameters are entirely undocumented, adding no semantic value beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose4/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Get Korean stock fundamentals and valuation ratios' clearly states the verb ('Get'), resource ('Korean stock fundamentals and valuation ratios'), and implies distinction from sibling tools like get_korean_stock_prices. However, it does not specify which fundamental metrics are included, slightly reducing clarity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus similar tools like get_korean_stock_overview or get_korean_stock_screeners. There are no exclusions or context for optimal use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have distinct purposes, but create_buy_ship_cart_order and create_direct_buy_ship_order are nearly identical, causing potential confusion. Additionally, build_buyer_discovery_queue and build_cash_sprint_packet overlap in targeting buyer segments.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (build_, get_, create_, search_) with consistent snake_case, making it easy to infer functionality from the name.
Tool Count3/5
With 26 tools covering diverse domains (stock market, real estate, tourism, sourcing, etc.), the scope feels broad and somewhat bloated. A more focused set would improve coherence.
Completeness3/5
The tool set covers many aspects of Korea data and seller workflows, but notable gaps exist: no tools for actual listing posting, sending communications, or completing transactions, as many build_ tools explicitly exclude those steps.