search_corp_code

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it downloads the entire corpCode.xml on first call and caches it in memory. This goes beyond basic purpose and helps the agent understand performance implications and caching behavior.

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 (3 sentences plus parameter/returns sections) and well-structured with clear sections. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage context, caching behavior, and parameter examples. No unnecessary text.

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 single parameter and the presence of an output schema (not shown but referenced), the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, how it works internally, and what it returns. No gaps identified.

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 only parameter, corp_name, has no description in the input schema (0% schema description coverage). The description fully compensates by providing clear examples ('삼성전자', '카카오', '네이버') and explaining its purpose, making the parameter semantics very clear.

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 explicitly states the tool's function: searching for DART's corp_code by company name. It also ties this to its use as a prerequisite for other API calls (e.g., get_company_info), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform different tasks.

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 explains when to use this tool (to find corp_code for other API calls) and notes its behavior (downloads and caches corpCode.xml). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative methods, though the sibling tools list and context make the purpose clear.

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