get_dividend_info

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 only states that the tool retrieves information, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as idempotency, rate limits, or data freshness. The lack of such details is a significant gap.

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 concise, with a one-line purpose followed by parameter explanations. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, the parameter list format is a bit informal (using 'Args:' marker) and could be streamlined.

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 lack of output schema, the description fails to explain what the tool returns or its structure. For a tool with three required parameters and no annotations, the description does not cover return format or any prerequisites (e.g., must have valid DART codes). This is a notable omission.

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 description adds meaningful explanations for all three parameters (corp_code, bsns_year, reprt_code), including the 8-digit format for corp_code and example values for reprt_code. Since the input schema has 0% coverage, this compensation is valuable, though the explanations are in Korean and could be more detailed.

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 that the tool retrieves cash and stock dividend information from DART. The verb '조회합니다' (retrieves) and resource 'dividend info' are specific. While it distinguishes from siblings in the financial domain, it could be more explicit about the scope (e.g., 'for a given company, year, and report type').

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. The description does not mention any context where this tool is preferred or any exclusions. With many sibling tools, explicit usage guidance is absent.

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