외국인·기관 순매매 상위 / 연속매매 현황

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the two views and their behavior (e.g., daily shows top net buy/sell by date, streak shows consecutive net buy for N days) and mentions API codes. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination, rate limits, or authentication needs, which are gaps for a data retrieval tool.

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 compact: two sentences plus a usage example. All sentences are necessary and front-loaded with key information (purpose, views, example queries). No wasted words.

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 has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, views, parameter usage, and market restrictions. It lacks details on return format, but this is partially compensated by the schema. Overall, it is functionally complete 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 coverage is 100%. The description adds context beyond the schema, such as default values for date (recent trading day) and market (differs by view), and explains how views affect parameter behavior. This adds meaningful guidance for parameter usage.

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 retrieves stocks heavily bought/sold by foreigners and institutions (specific verb and resource). It specifies two views (daily and streak) and provides usage examples, making the purpose distinct from sibling tools like get_investor_trend or get_market_movers.

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 gives explicit usage examples and clarifies that daily view supports all markets while streak only supports KOSPI/KOSDAQ. This helps the agent choose between views, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or alternative tools.

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