Japan Trade Statistics (customs data)

Report a data issue

report_data_issue

Report a data problem (differs from official figures, missing, wrong name, etc.) to the operator. Returns no figures. / データの誤り（公表値と違う、欠けている、名前が違うなど）を運営者に知らせます。数字の答えは返しません。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "flow": "<flow>",
      "code": "<code>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "report_data_issue"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	Yes	統計品目番号（9桁・6桁・4桁）か類（2桁）・部の番号。分からなければ search_items で探す / Statistical code (9, 6 or 4 digits) or chapter (2 digits) or section; use search_items to find it
`flow`	Yes	export＝輸出、import＝輸入 / export or import
`month`	No	月（YYYY-MM。省略時は最新の月） / Month as YYYY-MM (latest if omitted)
`message`	Yes	内容（2,000文字まで） / What is wrong (up to 2,000 characters)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 22, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / code / description

Added value: +"統計品目番号（9桁・6桁・4桁）か類（2桁）・部の番号。分からなければ search_items で探す / Statistical code (9, 6 or 4 digits) or chapter (2 digits) or section; use search_items to find it"

changedInput schema / properties / month / description

Previous value: -"YYYY-MM"New value: +"月（YYYY-MM。省略時は最新の月） / Month as YYYY-MM (latest if omitted)"

AddedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: it reports issues to the operator and explicitly returns no figures. It does not contradict the annotations, which mark the tool as non-read-only, non-destructive, and non-idempotent, consistent with submitting a report.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes the key output caveat. The bilingual duplication is compact and does not obscure the primary English statement.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given four fully documented parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering side-effect hints, the description is largely complete. It could say more about what confirmation or response the reporter receives, but the key behavioral constraint is stated.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the code, flow, month, and message parameters in detail. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: report a data problem to the operator. It gives concrete examples of issue types (differs from official figures, missing, wrong name) and distinguishes the tool from data-retrieval siblings by noting that no figures are returned.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clearly explains when to use the tool by describing the kinds of data problems that should be reported. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the reporting purpose is sufficiently distinct from the sibling retrieval tools.

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

All Japan Trade Statistics (customs data) tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?