기관·외국인 추정평균단가 조회

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the estimated nature of the price (추정평균단가), the distinction between daily and cumulative net buying, and how to interpret the results. However, it doesn't mention any rate limits, data latency, or output format details, so it falls short of a 5.

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 compact three-sentence structure that front-loads the purpose and uses each sentence for differentiation or interpretation guidance, with no filler.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description adequately conveys what data is returned (estimated average price and daily/cumulative net buying), and how to use it. It also provides alternatives and the API code, but could specify response structure more explicitly for full completeness.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description doesn't add meaning beyond the schema for parameters; it repeats the concept of cumulative net buying but doesn't specify parameter syntax or constraints beyond what the schema already lays out.

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 retrieves estimated average buy prices for institutions/foreigners and daily/period cumulative net buying for a specific stock. It explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by noting get_investor_trend for finer investor breakdown and get_foreign_holding for foreign share holdings, and asserts this tool is the only one providing unit price.

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 when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: use get_investor_trend for finer investor categories, get_foreign_holding for foreign ownership shares/limit ratio, and this tool when average unit price is needed. Also gives a practical interpretation context (comparing current price vs estimated price to assess profit/loss).

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