get_public_offering_fund_usage

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

No annotations present. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication needs, or rate limits. The verb '조회' implies read-only, but it is not explicit.

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 concise with one Korean sentence and a clear parameter list. Content is front-loaded. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate purpose from args) but overall efficient.

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?

Adequate for a query tool with three parameters but missing description of return values (no output schema). No information on prerequisites or error conditions. Could be more complete given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage; the description compensates by explaining each parameter: corp_code as 8-digit DART code, bsns_year as YYYY format with example, reprt_code with specific code mappings. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's property 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 public offering fund usage details. The name and description distinguish it from siblings like get_private_placement_fund_usage, but it does not explicitly differentiate.

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. Sibling tools exist (e.g., get_private_placement_fund_usage) but no comparative context is provided.

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