inquery-overseas-stock-price

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but provides minimal information. It states what the tool does but doesn't describe response format, error conditions, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether this is a read-only operation. For a financial data query tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered about how the tool actually behaves when invoked.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that gets straight to the point without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core functionality. While perhaps too brief given the lack of other documentation, the sentence itself is efficient and doesn't waste space on redundant information.

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's financial query nature, 2 required parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It states what the tool does at a high level but provides none of the operational details needed to use it effectively. Users need to understand parameter formats, response structure, and behavioral characteristics that are completely missing from this minimal description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 2 required parameters, the description provides no information about parameter meaning or usage. It doesn't explain what 'symbol' and 'market' represent, what formats they accept, or provide examples. The description doesn't compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation, leaving users to guess about parameter requirements for this overseas stock price query.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('overseas stock price from Korea Investment & Securities'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'inquery-stock-price' by specifying 'overseas' scope, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all siblings. The description avoids tautology by providing meaningful context beyond just restating the tool name.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when this overseas stock price query is appropriate compared to domestic tools like 'inquery-stock-price' or other overseas-related tools like 'order-overseas-stock'. There's no indication of prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases for this specific overseas price query functionality.

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