get_buying_power

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states 'read-only', which is valuable safety information, but does not mention authentication requirements, error cases, or whether the value is real-time. This is minimal but meaningful disclosure.

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 well-structured: a one-line summary followed by a clean Args block. Every element earns its place, and the read-only safety cue is included without bloat.

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 read-only getter with two parameters and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers parameter sourcing, valid currency values, and safety. It stops short of documenting exclusions or alternative tools, but those are not essential for correct invocation here.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It explains that account_seq is the numeric value returned by get_accounts() and that currency accepts 'KRW' or 'USD', adding real value beyond the bare 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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('cash buying power for one account'), and distinguishes it from siblings like get_sellable_quantity by focusing on cash buying power. The Korean parenthetical and read-only label reinforce the operation's nature.

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 clear context: it requires an account_seq returned by get_accounts(), which is a practical dependency. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the context is enough to guide correct invocation.

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