realestate_search_apt_rent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds the query scope (region/period) but does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or error behavior beyond the basic operation.

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 a single purpose sentence followed by a structured Args list. Each parameter is described efficiently, with no redundant wording.

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?

All parameters are documented with examples, and response_format options are noted. However, it does not mention prerequisite lookup via realestate_get_region_code or the meaning of openWorldHint, though the output schema likely covers return structure.

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, the description compensates by listing all 9 parameters with types and examples (e.g., '202401' for year_month, '전세'|'월세'|'전체' for rent_type). This adds essential semantics missing from 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 verb '조회한다' (retrieves) and resource '아파트 전월세 실거래가' (apartment jeonse/monthly rent transaction prices) with scope '특정 지역·기간'. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like realestate_search_apt_trade, which likely handles purchase transactions.

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 implies usage for reviewing rental transaction data over a specific region and period, but it does not explicitly mention when-not-to-use or compare to alternative sibling tools. There is no exclusion guidance.

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