수집 이력 목록

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('shows') but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it disclose return format or limitations. Purpose is clear, but behavioral details are minimal.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core function and followed by usage guidance. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does and when to use it. It implies the return structure (region, period, source dimensions) but does not explicitly outline it, which would be helpful for an agent. Still, it is sufficiently complete for a simple listing tool.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). The baseline for 0 params is 4, and while the description adds no parameter-specific semantics, none are needed.

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 shows which region, period, and source data is accumulated in the DB. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool price_history by positioning itself as a pre-check before calling that tool.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: call it before price_history to verify queryability, or when the user asks what data has been collected. This is a clear, actionable directive that also names an alternative tool.

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