상/하한가 조회

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds KRX scope and return format but does not disclose potential errors or edge cases. This is adequate 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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose, then includes Args and Returns sections. Some redundancy exists with the schema, but the structure is clear and information-dense.

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?

With only one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the full return structure (timestamp, upperLimitPrice, lowerLimitPrice, currency) and specifies the KRX scope. This is complete for a tool of this simplicity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description's Args section exactly repeats the schema's symbol description. No additional semantic meaning is provided beyond what the schema already contains, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 '특정 종목의 상한가/하한가를 조회합니다' (queries upper/lower price limits for a specific stock), using a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like toss_get_prices (current prices) and toss_get_orderbook.

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?

It specifies that the tool applies to '국내 KRX 종목' (domestic KRX stocks), providing a clear usage context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the scope constraint helps the agent decide suitability.

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