device_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb '조회한다' suggests a read-only query and '상세 정보' indicates the kind of result returned, but the description does not mention permissions, error behavior, response shape, or side-effect guarantees.

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?

A single, efficient declarative sentence with no filler. The action and scope are front-loaded: '조회한다' and '한 대의 상세 정보'.

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?

Adequate for a simple one-parameter read tool, but the absence of an output schema leaves 'detailed information' undefined. It also offers no context to help an agent decide when this tool is more appropriate than related device tools.

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%: the only parameter, deviceId, is already documented with a type and example ('예: D0517'). The description adds no extra meaning to the parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a clear verb and resource: '조회한다' (retrieves) and '측정기 한 대의 상세 정보' (detailed information of one measuring device). The phrase '한 대' implies singular scope, which helps distinguish it from device_list, but it does not explicitly name sibling tools.

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?

Provides no guidance about when to use this tool versus siblings such as device_list, device_realtime, or device_nearby_stations. There is no context about prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions.

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