searchSearch the covered stock universe by company name or ticker (KR/EN). Returns ids, titles, URLs, and short technical snippets. Pair with fetch for a full record.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Default 20, max 50. | |
| query | Yes | Company name or ticker substring (KR/EN). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context beyond these by specifying return fields (ids, titles, URLs, short technical snippets) and language scope (KR/EN). This provides useful behavioral transparency beyond the annotations.
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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return value, and includes a practical recommendation to pair with fetch. Every word contributes to understanding the tool without redundancy.
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 params and no output schema, the description explains purpose, search scope, return fields, and relationship to fetch. Combined with full schema coverage and clear annotations, it provides adequate context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.
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%, with descriptions for both query and limit. The description adds minimal semantic value, reinforcing that query searches by company name or ticker but not adding syntax or additional meaning 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 the tool's function: 'Search the covered stock universe by company name or ticker (KR/EN).' It specifies the resource (covered stock universe), search criteria (company name or ticker, KR/EN), and return contents (ids, titles, URLs, snippets). This differentiates it from siblings like fetch (full record) and list_covered_stocks (likely whole universe).
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 context for when to use search ('by company name or ticker') and recommends pairing with fetch for a full record, implying search returns snippets. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to use list_covered_stocks or screen_technicals, so it lacks complete exclusion guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
fetch and get_technical_analysis overlap in retrieving technical data for a stock, though fetch provides a full record while get_technical_analysis is limited to cached levels. search, list_covered_stocks, and screen_technicals are more distinct but still share the browsing/screening space.
The naming mixes short verbs (fetch, search) with longer verb_noun phrases (list_covered_stocks, screen_technicals) and a verb_adjective_noun (get_technical_analysis). The patterns are not consistent, but all names are readable and actions are inferable.
With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for a technical analysis domain. Each tool addresses a core need: retrieve, analyze, list, screen, and search, without excess or redundancy that would bloat the surface.
The domain is stock technical analysis, and the tool set covers the essential operations: fetching detailed records, accessing technical indicators, browsing the universe, screening, and searching. There are no obvious missing functions for read-only technical analysis.