get_stochastic

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state the return values (e.g., %K, %D, overbought/oversold) which gives some transparency, but it does not mention potential limitations such as insufficient historical data, error handling, or authentication requirements. The description is adequate but not rich in behavioral context.

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, focused sentence in Korean that efficiently states the tool's purpose and outputs. Every word earns its place, with no irrelevant details or repetition.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description's enumeration of return values (%K, %D, overbought/oversold, crossovers) provides a clear expectation. However, it does not describe the response format (e.g., array of objects) or mention the need for historical price data. For a 5-parameter tool, these are minor gaps, making it nearly complete.

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 coverage is 100% with all five parameters described, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a label 'Slow Stochastic' which aligns with the smooth_k parameter's meaning, but it does not enrich understanding of parameters beyond what the schema already provides. No additional semantic value is offered.

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 that the tool calculates the Slow Stochastic for a stock and lists the specific outputs: %K, %D, overbought/oversold zones, and crossover signals. This distinguishes it from sibling technical indicators by naming the exact indicator, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like RSI or MACD. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions that would help an agent decide to choose this tool over others, leaving the selection process without direction.

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