get_institution_branches

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says '조회합니다' (queries), implying a read operation, but does not state if it is read-only, whether it has side effects, or any other behavioral traits like rate limits or data freshness.

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 very concise—one sentence containing the main action and endpoint. However, it is too terse and misses critical information that could be included without bloating. Conciseness should not come at the expense of completeness.

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 the tool has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It does not explain what constitutes a 'branch', the structure of the response, or any edge cases. The agent is left with many unknowns.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameter. It does not clarify what 'org_code' represents or that 'limit' controls the number of branches returned. The schema provides minimal info (default and type), but the description adds no value.

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 queries a list of branches by institution code, referencing the endpoint '/brnch'. The tool name matches, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_institution_profile' or 'get_institution_metrics'. However, the description is very brief and lacks any nuance.

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 versus alternatives such as 'get_institution_profile' or 'find_institutions_by_criteria'. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or context for use.

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