get_non_audit_service

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a safe read operation ('조회합니다'), but does not explicitly state side effects, authentication needs, or data freshness. It's adequate for a typical read tool.

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 sentence explaining the purpose, followed by a clearly formatted parameter list. No unnecessary words.

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 and annotations, the description is adequate but could be improved by describing the structure of the returned data or any limitations (e.g., date ranges). It covers the purpose and parameters well.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the tool description compensates by providing detailed explanations for each parameter in the code block, including examples and allowed values for reprt_code. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's basic 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 retrieves non-audit service status with specifics about its relation to audit contracts. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_audit_fee or get_audit_opinion by focusing on non-audit services.

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. The description only explains what the tool does without indicating context or exclusion criteria.

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