종목 현재가 조회

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

Since no annotations provided, description carries full burden. It discloses data returned: industry, listing date, and caution status. However, does not mention any authentication requirements or potential rate limits, which are relevant for a query tool. Still, it provides useful additional context beyond basic purpose.

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 concise sentences: first sentence states core function, second adds additional outputs and usage guidance. No wasted words, information is front-loaded and scannable.

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, description comprehensively lists return values: current price, fluctuation rate, volume, basic indicators, industry, listing date, caution status. Also mentions source (키움 ka10001). For a simple tool with one parameter, this is complete.

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%, and description adds meaning: explains the 6-digit format, gives examples (삼성전자 005930, KODEX 200 069500), and clarifies that stock_code is the input. This exceeds what the schema alone 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 the verb '조회' (query) and resource '국내 주식/ETF' with specific outputs: current price, fluctuation rate, volume, basic indicators. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning additional outputs like caution status and referencing search_stock for name lookup.

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: when you have a 6-digit stock code. Provides explicit alternative: '종목명만 알고 있다면 search_stock으로 먼저 코드를 찾으세요' (if only know name, use search_stock first). This is clear guidance for agent decision-making.

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