get_price_data

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

The description discloses that certain parameters are auto-handled, warns that date-based queries are limited to 1-month ranges, and explains pagination behavior (fetch_all, page_no). It does not mention any destructive actions, and since no annotations are provided, the description fully covers behavioral expectations.

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 relatively long but well-structured: it starts with the core usage pattern, lists all operations clearly, provides common parameters, and includes warnings. While verbose, every sentence adds value for a complex tool with 11 operations. Minor reduction for length.

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?

Given the complexity of the tool (11 operations, many parameters, pagination), the description is remarkably complete. It explains the purpose, usage pattern, parameter details, and limitations. There is no output schema, but the description directs users to get_g2b_operation_info for response fields, which compensates.

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?

Input schema provides descriptions for all 5 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds additional context by listing common query parameters (inqryDiv, inqryBgnDt, etc.) and explaining their typical usage, as well as how fetch_all and page_no work. It also directs users to get_g2b_operation_info for detailed parameter keys.

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 is a tool for querying price information from the Korean government procurement OpenAPI (나라장터). It lists 11 specific operations with Korean names and descriptions, distinguishing it from other sibling tools like get_bid_data, get_contract_data, etc.

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 explicit guidance on how to use the tool: set 'operation' to one of the listed operation names, pass query parameters in 'params' as a dict, notes that numOfRows/pageNo/type/serviceKey are auto-handled, and directs to get_g2b_operation_info for exact parameters. It also includes warnings about date range limitations and suggests splitting into monthly intervals.

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