get_investor_trading

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only notes the market scope limitation (KOSPI/KOSDAQ). It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, any authentication needs, rate limits, or what side effects (if any) occur. For a data retrieval tool, this is insufficient.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and limitations. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the returned data looks like (e.g., a list of volume by investor type, format), nor does it provide usage context like typical use cases. The tool is moderately simple, but the description still leaves significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema; it does not clarify how parameters like 'interval' or 'count' affect the investor type breakdown. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves trading volume by investor type (individual/foreign/institutional) and specifies the supported markets (KOSPI/KOSDAQ). The verb '조회' (view) and resource '투자자별 매매대금' (trading volume by investor type) are specific and distinct from siblings like get_candles or get_orderbook.

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 over alternatives. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it. The description only states the market limitation, but does not help an agent decide between this and similar data retrieval tools.

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