build_company_meta

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses time cost ('수분 소요' - takes minutes) and testing capability (limit). However, it does not explicitly state that the operation may overwrite existing cache or require specific permissions, leaving some behavioral traits unclear.

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 concise with three sentences, front-loading the primary action. It efficiently conveys purpose, timing, and parameter usage without redundancy. Minor lack of structural formatting (e.g., bullet points) is acceptable for brevity.

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 (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers purpose, time cost, CLI recommendation, and partial testing. It is sufficiently complete for an admin cache-building tool, though it could mention return behavior or success indication.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate for the lone parameter 'limit'. It adds meaning by explaining that limit allows partial testing, which is crucial for understanding the parameter's role. This goes beyond the schema which only defines type and default.

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 builds/updates a meta cache for listed companies' market and industry, using specific verb '구축/갱신' (build/update) and naming the resource '상장사 시장×업종 메타 캐시'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling query tools like get_company_note or list_industries by targeting cache construction, not data retrieval.

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 recommends running via CLI for full execution and mentions limit for partial testing, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. It implies use for cache building but lacks exclusionary guidance or comparison with sibling tools.

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