auction_item_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only mentions returning None if no data, but fails to disclose read-only nature, permissions, side effects, or error handling. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 brief and well-structured with Args and Returns sections. It is front-loaded with the purpose. Minor redundancy exists between the first sentence and the Args section, but overall it is concise.

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?

With an output schema present and moderate complexity, the description covers parameter purpose and return behavior (None if missing). However, it lacks information on potential errors, rate limits, or authentication requirements, leaving some gaps.

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%, but the description fully explains each parameter in Korean, including an example format for case_no and default behavior for item_no. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema names and types.

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 it retrieves detailed information of a court auction item, including specific fields like appraised value and minimum price. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are likely case search or captcha handling.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it. Users are left to infer usage context from parameter descriptions alone.

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