get_stock_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The verb '조회' (query) implies a read-only operation, which is a basic safety indicator. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, rate limits, or response format beyond the name. The shortcut detail adds some implementation transparency but not deep 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 sentence with a useful parenthetical. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and adds the equivalent call_api mapping without any fluff. Every word earns its place.

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?

While the tool is simple and the purpose is clear, there is no output schema, and the description does not mention what the response contains (e.g., current price only, additional market data). It is minimally viable but lacks completion on return value expectations and any usage prerequisites.

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%, with the stock_code parameter fully documented (6-digit code, example). The description adds no extra parameter meaning, but the schema already covers everything needed. Baseline 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 the tool 'queries the current price of domestic stocks' with a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it is a shortcut for the call_api function krstockQuoteCurrentPrice, making its purpose unique.

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 parenthetical '단축 도구 = call_api 로 krstockQuoteCurrentPrice 를 호출하는 것과 동일' (shortcut tool = same as calling krstockQuoteCurrentPrice via call_api) provides clear context for when to use this tool instead of the generic call_api. While it doesn't explicitly list exclusions, the equivalence note gives adequate usage guidance for a simple lookup tool.

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