search_stock

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 list of matched stocks and that if multiple matches exist, the user should be asked to confirm. It implies a read-only lookup operation. While it does not explicitly state authentication or rate limits, the behavioral traits are adequately transparent for a simple lookup tool.

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 relatively concise and well-structured, with a clear title, warnings, and bullet-pointed parameter and return descriptions. It is front-loaded with the purpose. While a bit lengthy, every sentence adds value, including usage guidelines and examples.

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 the low complexity (one parameter), the presence of an output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete. It covers purpose, when to use, parameter meaning, and return format (list of matches with user confirmation if multiple). No additional information is necessary for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 description adds significant meaning to the 'query' parameter beyond the schema, which has no description. It explains that the query can be a stock name in Korean/English or a 6-digit code, and provides examples. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates and makes the parameter clear.

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 the tool's purpose: '종목코드조회 (stock lookup) — 한국 주식 종목명/코드 조회 전용 도구', which translates to 'stock code lookup — dedicated tool for searching Korean stock names/codes.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it is an alias of 'search' and provides a specific use case for when to use it (when only the name is known), differentiating from other tools like get_price.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: '종목명만 있고 6자리 코드를 모를 때 이 도구를 먼저 호출해야 합니다.' (When you only have the stock name and don't know the 6-digit code, you must call this tool first.) It also warns against guessing codes and explains the consequence of using wrong codes in other tools, providing clear usage guidance.

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