장중 주체별 순매수 상위 (실시간)

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses that values are provisional in 1,000-share units, may differ from final values after market close, and can even have reversed signs. It also explains why certain investor types are not queryable, adding critical 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.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance, caveats, and alternatives. Every segment earns its place, using bold and em-dashes to emphasize key points without redundancy. Despite its length, it remains efficient for the complexity involved.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, 4 enums, no output schema), the description is complete enough for correct invocation. It covers the real-time scope, investor limitations, provisional value behavior, and explicit tool alternatives, ensuring an agent can decide when to use it and what to expect.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that the unit parameter is only valid for the foreign investor, that the market parameter results in server-side sorting, and that investors like individuals and financial investment are not supported. These details are not present in the schema property descriptions.

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 extracts stocks that a specific investor is currently buying during regular market hours ('어떤 주체가 지금 사고 있는 종목') and identifies the resource ('전 종목에서'). It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning alternatives (get_net_buy_rank for settled days, get_investor_trend for specific stocks).

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?

It provides explicit usage guidance: '실시간 수급을 볼 때 쓰세요' (use when viewing real-time supply/demand), and clearly contrasts with post-market and single-stock alternatives. It also states the exchange limitation: individual and financial investment investor types are unavailable during market hours.

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