get_homepage_position

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the output fields and the keyword filter behavior, but does not explicitly confirm it is read-only, nor mention side effects, pagination, or handling of empty keyword. Over a '조회' (inquiry) verb implies non-mutating, but it is not explicit, and no additional behavioral context is given.

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 three short lines with no filler. It front-loads the purpose and then explains the parameter. Every sentence adds value and there is zero 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?

For a simple one-parameter lookup, the description is mostly sufficient: it states the returned data and the filter meaning. However, it does not mention what happens when keyword is empty (e.g., returns all or none) or offer any alternative tools, leaving minor gaps that an agent might need to infer. The presence of an output schema covers the return structure.

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 the only parameter, 'keyword', as a partial match filter on job title name, which adds meaning beyond the schema's generic 'Keyword' label. It does not specify details like case sensitivity or behavior when empty, but the core semantics are clearly conveyed.

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 inquires about KORAIL homepage job position codes and lists the returned fields (ID, name, code). It is specific about the resource and action, though it does not contrast with sibling code-lookup tools, leaving some potential ambiguity.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention that it is specifically for homepage positions, nor does it offer exclusions or point to sibling tools like get_job_grades. The usage context is only implied by the tool name.

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