관심종목 그룹 상세

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses read-only behavior and explains that stock name, previous close, and market are supplemented from the stock master. Missing are rate limits or error handling, but for a simple retrieval tool this is adequate.

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?

Three efficient sentences with no fluff. Purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value (purpose, usage, alternative, output enrichment).

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameter semantics, usage guidance, behavioral transparency (read-only, data enrichment), and sibling tool reference. The agent can correctly invoke the tool without ambiguity.

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% with description for 'group' already explaining it is a group code or name referencing get_watchlist_groups. The description adds examples ('000', 'etf') and clarifies that either can be used, adding value beyond the schema.

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 it retrieves the list of items in an interest stock group, specifies the source (Kiwoom ka01301), and notes it is read-only. This distinguishes it from sibling tool get_watchlist_groups which lists groups.

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 says to pass a group code or name, and advises using get_watchlist_groups first if the group is unknown. Provides examples ('000', 'etf') for clarity.

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