ownership_treasury

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

Despite no annotations, description discloses that data is annual baseline from business reports, not real-time. However, it does not explicitly state read-only nature or other behavioral traits like idempotency, but the context is sufficient.

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 with 'desc', 'when', 'rule', 'ref', and 'Args' sections. Front-loaded purpose. Slightly verbose due to Korean and English mix but still clear and organized.

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 output schema exists and tool is simple retrieval with 3 params, description covers core purpose, usage context, and parameter meanings. Missing details about output format but not critical as output schema presumably handles it.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, description adds clear explanations: ticker as company code/name, year as fiscal year defaulting to previous year, format as md or json. This compensates well for missing 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?

Description clearly states the tool shows treasury stock balances by acquisition method (기초-취득-처분-소각-기말 잔액), distinguishing it from sibling tools like ownership_treasury_tx (latest events) and ownership_total (total balance).

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' clause specifies this is a tier-5 detail tool to be used only after ownership_full_analysis and when user requests details by acquisition method. Also notes it's annual baseline, with alternative for latest events.

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