get_bond_issuance

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or data freshness. For a tool without annotations, the description should carry this burden but only mentions parameter usage.

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?

Description is short and front-loaded: a purpose sentence followed by clear parameter explanations. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simple retrieval tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient information for an agent to understand the function and required inputs. It lacks details on return format or pagination, but is adequate given the context.

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%, but the description fully compensates by explaining all three parameters: corp_code (8-digit unique number), bsns_year (YYYY format with example), reprt_code (four report types with codes). This adds critical meaning beyond the schema titles.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves corporate bond issuance and redemption performance (회사채 발행 및 상환 실적). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like get_convertible_bond, get_exchangeable_bond, get_corp_bond_outstanding, etc.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only provides parameter details but no context about when to prefer this over sibling tools like get_debt_securities or get_corp_bond_outstanding.

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