get_index_ohlcv

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by specifying the return format (DataFrame), showing example output structure, and explaining parameter formats. However, it doesn't mention potential limitations like rate limits, authentication needs, or data availability constraints.

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?

Well-structured with purpose statement, parameter documentation, return specification, and concrete example. Every sentence adds value - no redundant information. The example output is appropriately detailed to illustrate the DataFrame structure.

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?

For a data retrieval tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides excellent context about parameters and return format. The example DataFrame shows exactly what to expect. Minor deduction because it doesn't address potential error conditions or data source limitations.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates excellently by explaining all 4 parameters with clear semantics: date formats (YYYYMMDD), ticker examples (1001 for KOSPI), frequency options (d/m/y), and default values. The example call demonstrates proper parameter usage.

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 tool's purpose with specific verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('OHLCV data for a specific index'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_stock_ohlcv by specifying it's for indices rather than individual stocks.

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?

The description implies usage context through parameter explanations and example, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_stock_ohlcv. No explicit guidance on when-not-to-use or comparison with sibling tools is provided.

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