get_financials

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

No annotations provided, but description explains scope-dependent behavior, response size impact of sj_div, and speed differences. Lacks error conditions or rate limits but sufficient for safe use.

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?

Description is informative but somewhat verbose with multi-sentence explanations. Core purpose is front-loaded, but could be more concise.

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?

Completeness is good given no output schema; covers all parameters and behavioral nuances. Does not describe return format explicitly but implied by '행' (rows).

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 description coverage is high (83%), but description adds valuable context for scope and sj_div, including corps count limitations and default response size reduction that schema doesn't capture.

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 '재무정보 조회' (financial info retrieval) and distinguishes between summary (key accounts) and full (complete statements). However, it could better differentiate from sibling tools like get_xbrl.

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 describes when to use summary (single/multi companies, fast) vs full (single company, detailed), and how sj_div can reduce response size. Also explains constraints on corps count per scope.

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