search

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions that codes can change, adding some context, but does not explicitly state read-only or non-destructive behavior, rate limits, or side effects. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Every sentence adds value: purpose, examples, usage rule, alias. No unnecessary words. Well-structured with bullet points and warnings.

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 one-parameter search tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, parameter examples, and alias. It is complete and leaves no obvious gaps.

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 schema only defines 'query' as a string with no description. The description adds meaning by providing examples ('삼성전자', '005930', '알멕') and explaining it can be a name, code, or partial query, compensating for the 0% schema coverage.

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 that the tool searches Korean stocks by name or code, with examples ('삼성전자', '005930'). It distinguishes from siblings as the primary search tool and mentions an alias (search_stock).

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 instructs to use this tool first when the user provides a stock name without a code, warns against guessing codes due to possible delisting/reassignment, and provides clear when-to-use guidance.

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