get_stock_price

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 identifies the operation as a read (current price) and discloses a usage restriction (personal trading only) and a capacity limit (200 symbols). However, it does not detail error handling or authentication requirements.

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 and front-loaded with the purpose. It uses two short paragraphs, but the warning about terms of use adds necessary behavioral context. Could be slightly more compact, but overall effective.

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 simple single-parameter tool and the existence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter format, and restrictions. No significant gaps are present for this complexity level.

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 for the symbols parameter. The description compensates fully by explaining it is comma-separated, up to 200 symbols, with examples for domestic (6-digit codes) and US (tickers). This provides complete semantic meaning.

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 explicitly states it retrieves the current price of a stock ('종목의 현재가를 조회합니다') and provides usage context. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools (account balance, holdings, transactions) which cover different financial data.

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?

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance: call when user asks about current stock price. It also specifies the symbol format and a batch limit of 200. It does not explicitly list when not to use, but the sibling tools cover other use cases.

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