price_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool computes statistics, without mentioning whether it is read-only, requires permissions, or any side effects. For a simple aggregation tool, the lack of explicit safety cues is a minor gap.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. The key function (aggregates of price_manwon) is front-loaded, and the convenience aspect is stated efficiently.

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 simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core function and rationale. However, it omits the return format, which could be helpful for an agent deciding how to use results. Still, it is mostly complete for the intended use case.

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, and the description only indirectly explains parameters by mentioning 'grouped by a column' and the default column 'sigungu'. It does not describe the 'table' parameter or valid values, leaving the agent to infer details. The description adds some meaning but is insufficient for full understanding.

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 computes average, min, max, and count of price_manwon grouped by a column. It distinguishes itself from siblings like query_sql by being a specialized convenience tool, avoiding hand-written SQL.

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 use for simple aggregation tasks on price_manwon, suggesting it saves effort compared to writing SQL. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like query_sql for more complex queries.

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