agm_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses inclusion of correction notices, marking of latest correction with '← 최신', and search by ticker/code. Could mention idempotency or read-only nature more explicitly, but sufficient for a search 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?

Structured into clear sections (desc, when, rule, ref, Args). Every sentence adds value, no redundancy. Purpose is front-loaded. Concisely covers all necessary information.

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?

With output schema present, description need not detail return values. Already states returns list of rcept_no. References prerequisite (corp_identifier). Context signals indicate parameters are simple, and description covers usage and behavior adequately for the tool's complexity.

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 0%, but the description clearly explains each parameter in the 'Args' section: ticker as stock code or company name, bgn_de and end_de with format and defaults. This fully compensates for lack of schema descriptions.

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 verb '검색' (search) and the resource '주주총회 소집공고' (shareholders' meeting notice). It also specifies the output 'rcept_no 리스트 반환' (returns a list of rcept_no), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that likely consume rcept_no.

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?

Explicit 'when' section: '특정 기업의 주총 공고를 찾을 때. 다른 agm_* tool에 필요한 rcept_no를 여기서 획득. corp_identifier 실행 후 호출할 것.' Provides context, states it provides input for other tools, and gives a prerequisite (corp_identifier), which is excellent guidance.

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