종목 기본 정보 조회

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, including null conventions: delistDate is null if listed, leverageFactor null for common shares, and koreanMarketDetail null for overseas stocks. It also specifies the 200-symbol maximum, which is not in the annotations.

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 well-organized with a one-line summary, an Args section, and a Returns section. The Returns section lists 14 fields with brief explanations, which is comprehensive but not wasteful. Each part serves a clear purpose.

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?

The tool has a complex return object with no output schema, and the description thoroughly documents all return fields and their null states, giving a complete picture. It does not mention error handling for invalid symbols, but that is acceptable for a read-only query tool.

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 input schema already describes the 'symbols' parameter with the same format and example as the function description, achieving 100% coverage. The description repeats this information without adding new meaning, so it stays at the baseline.

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 opens with '여러 종목의 기본 정보를 조회합니다' (queries basic info for multiple stocks), clearly identifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on '기본 정보' (basic info), separate from prices, orderbooks, or trades.

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 context by noting a 200-symbol limit and comma-separated format, which implies how to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like toss_get_prices or toss_get_orderbook, nor does it state any exclusions.

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