data_recent

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

The description implies a read-only query operation, which is a useful behavioral signal. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does not explain the meaning of 'recent', the ordering of results, or any limits beyond the schema's maxRows field. It does not contradict any annotations.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the key verb and resource, though it is arguably too terse to fully equip an agent navigating a large set of sibling data tools.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, and it sits among many data-related siblings. The description does not clarify the recency window, whether results are time-ordered, what fields are returned, or how this tool differs from data_search and device_realtime, leaving important selection and invocation context missing.

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 100%, so the parameters deviceId and maxRows are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about how the parameters interact with 'recent' data, which is acceptable but does not exceed the schema's contribution.

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 a specific action ('조회한다' / retrieves) and a specific resource ('측정기의 최근 수집 데이터' / recent collected data for a measuring device). However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as data_search, data_raw_search, or device_realtime, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like data_search, data_raw_search, or device_realtime. There are no exclusions, conditions, or mention of related tools that might better suit a different request.

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