get_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a single point-in-time snapshot, not history, and explains how NXT-related stocks are handled by showing KRX regular market data by default and appending NXT data separately without mixing exchanges. Some edge behaviors like error cases or delayed quotes are not covered, but the description is substantially transparent.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, uses compact warning-style reminders, and only includes necessary caveats such as multi-stock, chart/history, and NXT behavior. Every sentence adds relevant value and the structure is 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?

Given that the tool has one parameter, an output schema, and no annotations, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers purpose, scope, exchange behavior, parameter format, and clear alternatives for related tools, so an agent has enough context to invoke it correctly.

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?

The input schema only defines code as a required string, but the description supplies the essential semantic detail: '종목코드 6자리 (예: "005930")'. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage and removes ambiguity about parameter format.

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 defines get_price as a current-price snapshot for a stock, including today's OHLC and volume. It also explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_multi_stocks and get_chart, making the purpose and scope 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 when-to-use guidance with example queries like '삼성전자 지금 얼마', and gives clear alternatives: '종목이 2개 이상이면 get_multi_stocks를 쓰세요' and '차트/히스토리 필요 시 get_chart 사용'. This directly helps an agent select between competing tools.

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