get_esg_index_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the tool retrieves information and documents the basDd parameter. It does not mention safety, side effects, read-only nature, or return behavior, which is a notable gap for a query tool.

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 extremely concise: one purpose sentence plus a structured Args list. There is no redundant content and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

The tool is simple (1 required parameter) and has an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency, leaving the contextual picture incomplete despite the minimal complexity.

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 includes an Args section explaining basDd as '기준일자 (YYYYMMDD)', providing both semantic meaning (base date) and format. Since the schema has zero description coverage for this parameter, the description fully compensates and adds value.

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 states 'ESG 지수 정보를 조회합니다' (retrieve ESG index information), using a clear verb and resource. It is not a tautology, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_esg_etp_info, relying on the name for distinction.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description gives no context on when to use this tool vs. alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The only hint is the tool name itself.

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