get_orderbook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation via 'Get', and adds the single-symbol constraint, but does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as rate limits, data freshness, or authentication requirements. This is acceptable for a simple read tool but not rich.

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 compact and front-loaded: the purpose appears in the first sentence, followed by a clearly formatted Args section. The Korean parenthetical is minor and does not detract from the overall efficiency.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the purpose, the exact parameter format, and the key constraint. Return values are presumably documented in the output schema, so no additional explanation is needed.

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 schema only lists 'symbol' as a string with no description (0% coverage). The description compensates fully by specifying no market prefix, giving concrete examples ('005930', 'AAPL'), and highlighting the single-symbol limitation. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Get the current bid/ask order book for a single symbol.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_current_price or get_recent_trades, and emphasizes the single-symbol scope.

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 gives clear context: the tool works for one ticker symbol only, and explicitly warns 'Only one symbol is accepted per call.' It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the scope is well-defined.

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