get_hybrid_bond

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states it 'inquires' (read-only), but omits details on pagination, error handling, potential empty results, or required permissions. The agent lacks information about what happens when parameters are invalid.

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: a single purpose sentence followed by a well-structured argument list. No extraneous content; every sentence contributes meaning.

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?

While the purpose and parameters are adequately described, the tool lacks output schema and the description does not specify the structure or format of the return value (e.g., number, list, fields). This incomplete information may hamper correct result interpretation.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates. It explains each parameter's format (corp_code 8 digits, bsns_year YYYY, reprt_code specific report types) with examples, adding critical meaning beyond the schema's bare 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?

The description clearly states the tool queries the outstanding balance of hybrid bonds (신종자본증권 미상환 잔액을 조회). It uses a specific verb-resource combination, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_corp_bond_outstanding or get_debt_securities_outstanding.

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 alternatives. Missing context about prerequisites (e.g., obtaining corp_code from get_corp_codes) or report code meanings beyond the provided examples.

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