get_apt_rent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the query parameters and does not mention pagination, response format, data source, rate limits, or any side effects. Although '조회' (inquiry) hints at a read-only operation, this is insufficient for a 4-parameter tool with no output schema.

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 a single, clear sentence in Korean that immediately communicates the purpose and key dimensions. It is front-loaded with the core function and avoids any filler, making it highly 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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the minimal description leaves significant gaps. It does not explain pagination behavior, response structure, or any prerequisites, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly without additional assumptions.

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 description only mentions the two required parameters (regionCode and dealYearMonth), which are already described in the schema with examples. It does not add meaning for the pagination parameters pageNo and numOfRows, leaving them unexplained. With 50% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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's function: retrieving actual transaction prices for apartment jeonse/wolse (rent) using region code and contract year-month. The phrase '아파트 전월세' (apartment rent) distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_apt_trade (apartment sales) and get_offi_rent (office rent), satisfying the specific verb+resource+scope criterion.

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 implies usage for apartment rental price lookups by specifying the property type and transaction type, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. It offers clear context but no direct guidance on choosing among sibling tools.

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