get_kospi_stock_daily

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic retrieval action and does not disclose data scope, return volume, read-only nature, pagination, or any limitations. This is minimal disclosure beyond the tool's core purpose.

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 very short and front-loaded, with the parameter details in a clear Args block. It is appropriately concise with no redundant text, though the brevity omits important context.

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 (one parameter) and has an output schema, so return values are not needed in the description. However, the description leaves ambiguity about the data scope (individual stock vs. aggregate market) and provides no usage context or alternative guidance, making it incomplete for reliable tool selection and invocation.

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 explains basDd as 기준일자 (YYYYMMDD), providing a clear semantic meaning and format that the schema (just a string type) lacks. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, though it only covers the single parameter briefly.

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 the action (조회/retrieve) and resource (유가증권(KOSPI) 일별매매정보, i.e., KOSPI daily trading information). It distinguishes from index tools via the 'stock' in the tool name and the mention of KOSPI. However, the Korean term '유가증권' is ambiguous and the description does not specify whether the tool returns data for individual stocks or the aggregate market, which prevents a perfect score.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_kospi_index_daily or get_kosdaq_stock_daily. The description only gives the parameter format, with no contextual or alternative-specific advice.

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