get_us_search

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

No annotations provided, so description must bear the burden. Only describes search behavior; does not explicitly state it is read-only or disclose any side effects. Minimal extra behavioral context beyond basic function.

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?

Concise with front-loaded purpose, examples, a warning, and arg description. No fluff, but the bilingual text slightly increases length. Still efficient for its content.

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?

Covers parameter semantics and usage guidance well. Output schema externally provided, so return value explanation unnecessary. Lacks mention of error handling or rate limits, but for a simple search with one param, adequately 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 has 0% coverage, but description provides useful clarification: 'query: 검색어 (회사명·티커, 한/영 무관)' – explains it accepts company names, tickers, in Korean or English, adding value beyond schema's generic 'Query'.

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 identifies the tool as a US stock search for company names/tickers, with examples. Differentiates from sibling search tools by focusing on US stocks and providing specific guidance for Korean queries.

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 to call this tool first when user gives company names like '애플' and instructs to confirm with user if multiple results. Lacks explicit when-not or alternative tool references, but the guidance is clear.

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