get_market_indicator_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It uses the Korean word '조회' (inquiry) implying a non-destructive read operation, but does not disclose any other behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or response characteristics.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is concise but could be more structured, for example by separating usage from examples. However, no unnecessary words exist.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain what the returned data looks like and any constraints. It only mentions it returns current prices, missing details on format, limits, or pagination.

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 100%: the only parameter 'symbols' has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond a Korean translation of the schema description, so it does not improve parameter understanding.

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 is for retrieving current prices of market indicators like KOSPI and KOSDAQ. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_prices (likely for stocks) and get_market_indicator_candles (historical data), but does not explicitly mention these distinctions.

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, such as get_prices or get_market_indicator_candles. The description implies it's for indices but does not explicitly state exclusions or context.

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