투자자 주체별 순매수 상위 (시장 전체)

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It mentions performance (15-20 seconds) and clarifies that market is required, plus explains side=net bottom as net sell. Does not discuss data freshness or potential errors, but adequate 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?

Description is informative but slightly verbose due to multiple alternative tool references and repeated mentions. However, it remains organized and each sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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?

No output schema is provided, yet the description does not explain the return structure (e.g., list of stocks with net buy amounts). It mentions '순매수 상위' but lacks explicit field details. Given the tool is a ranking query, users might need to infer the output format. Performance note is helpful, but return format clarification would improve 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?

Every parameter is described with enum values and Korean translations (e.g., subject: individual=개인, foreign=외국인). The market parameter includes additional context about query cost. Schema coverage is 100% and description adds meaningful context beyond the enum names.

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?

Clearly states it ranks net buy by investor type and market, distinguishing from siblings like get_investor_trend and get_investor_rank by specific use cases.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (searching stocks by investor type) and when not to use (already have a stock -> get_investor_trend; only foreign/institution -> get_investor_rank; real-time foreign -> get_foreign_intraday). Provides clear alternative guidance.

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