get_equity_securities_acquisition

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states it retrieves information, with no mention of side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or any behavioral 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?

The description is short and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by parameter details. However, it mixes Korean and English, which is acceptable but not ideal. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

With no output schema, the description should mention return values or pagination. It covers parameters well but omits any description of the response format. Adequate for a simple query but not fully complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the Args section explains each parameter's meaning and format (corp_code: 8-digit DART code; bgn_de/end_de: YYYYMMDD, optional). This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 retrieves information on decisions to acquire bonds related to equity securities (주권 관련 사채권 양수 결정). The verb '조회' indicates querying. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_equity_securities_transfer or get_equity_securities.

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 on when to use this tool versus similar siblings. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it over alternatives like get_equity_securities or get_business_acquisition.

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