get_kosdaq_stock_futures_daily

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb '조회합니다' implies a read operation, but the description does not explicitly state read-only behavior, error conditions, or any other behavioral traits beyond the basic retrieval action.

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 sentence stating the tool's function followed by an Args section detailing the parameter. No unnecessary words or repetition; each sentence serves a 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with an existing output schema, the description is mostly complete: it explains what the tool does and the exact date format. The only gap is the lack of alternative tool guidance, but that is a minor deficiency given the tool's simplicity.

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 schema provides no description for the parameter basDd (0% coverage), but the description fully compensates by explaining it as '기준일자 (YYYYMMDD)' meaning base date in YYYYMMDD format. This adds critical meaning beyond the structured 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 states a specific verb '조회합니다' (retrieves) and clearly identifies the resource as '주식선물(코스닥) 일별매매정보' (KOSDAQ stock futures daily trading information). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_kospi_stock_futures_daily and get_options_daily by specifying the KOSDAQ market.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_kospi_stock_futures_daily or get_futures_daily. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or tool selection context beyond the tool's name.

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