외국인·기관 순매매 상위 / 연속매매 현황

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It explains that the data is based on trading (매매 기준) and notes potential sign differences from get_foreign_holding, but it does not describe the output format or any side effects. Still, it effectively communicates the data semantics and default behaviors.

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 dense yet well-structured, using semicolons to separate ideas. Each sentence adds essential information without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 lack of an output schema, the description does not explicitly state what the return data looks like, but it covers key contextual aspects like view-specific market support and differentiation from sibling tools. It is sufficiently complete for practical usage, though a mention of the output structure would improve it.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying which market values are valid for daily vs. streak views and clarifying that days applies only to streak. This goes beyond the schema's basic parameter 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's function: querying stocks heavily bought/sold by foreigners and institutions, with explicit daily and streak views. It also distinguishes itself from related tools like get_foreign_holding and get_net_buy_rank, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as using get_net_buy_rank for 12-entity selection and get_foreign_holding for holding-based criteria. It also clarifies the valid market options for each view, enabling correct selection.

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