업종별 투자자 순매수 조회

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool returns aggregated sector data including investor-type breakdowns and index change. It also notes it fetches all sectors at once. While it doesn't mention auth or rate limits, the read-only nature is clear, and it adds context about the API key (키움 ka10051) and return contents.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then a concise usage guide. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or repetition.

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, but description explains what is returned (per-sector net buys by investor type, index change). Combined with detailed parameter schema and explicit sibling differentiation, the tool is well-contextualized. Minor gaps like pagination or error handling, but sufficient for typical use.

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 3. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, only implicitly framing the tool's purpose. No extra semantics for top, sort, unit, market, or base_date beyond what schema already provides.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves net purchases by investor type for all sectors at once ('시장 전체 업종의 투자자 주체별 순매수를 한 번에 조회합니다'), with specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by naming alternatives like get_investor_trend and get_sector_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?

Provides explicit when-to-use context ('오늘 돈이 어느 섹터로 갔나') and directly names alternatives for other use cases: stock-level use get_investor_trend, top stocks use get_investor_rank, sector details use get_sector_price/get_sector_stocks.

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