get_sh_rent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The verb '조회' clearly indicates a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, rate limits, or authorization requirements. It also does not contradict any annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose and key parameters. No wasted 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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and four parameters, the description is too brief. It does not explain the return value structure, pagination behavior, or expected usage patterns. An agent would lack critical information to correctly process the response.

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 description coverage is 50%. The description mentions 지역코드 and 계약년월, but these are already covered by the schema descriptions. It does not add meaning for the undocumented pageNo and numOfRows parameters, nor does it explain pagination. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 verb '조회' (inquire) and the resource '단독/다가구 전월세 실거래가' (single/multi-household jeonse/wolse actual transaction price). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_apt_rent or get_sh_trade by housing type and transaction type.

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 context through the housing type and transaction type (단독/다가구 전월세), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide exclusions. The sibling list is not referenced.

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