인증된 학생의 u-SAINT 졸업요건 상태와 공식 학칙/졸업 안내 근거를 함께 반환합니다. mcp_session_id를 생략하면 현재 transport에 안전하게 바인딩된 세션을 사용합니다.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| live | No | true면 공식 원문을 live fetch. false/생략이면 빠른 seed corpus 검색. | |
| question | No | 추가로 확인할 졸업 질문. 생략하면 졸업요건, 이수학점, 전공/교양 기준을 검색합니다. | |
| mcp_session_id | No | 선택 MCP session ID. 생략하면 현재 MCP transport에 안전하게 바인딩된 세션을 사용합니다. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / mcp_session_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"start_auth(SAINT)로 발급받은 MCP session ID. 없거나 SAINT 미연동이면 loginUrl과 함께 AUTH_REQUIRED를 반환."New value: +"선택 MCP session ID. 생략하면 현재 MCP transport에 안전하게 바인딩된 세션을 사용합니다."Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "mcp_session_id"
-]New value: +[]Input schema / properties / mcp_session_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"MCP session ID issued by start_auth(SAINT). If absent or SAINT not linked, returns AUTH_REQUIRED with a loginUrl."New value: +"start_auth(SAINT)로 발급받은 MCP session ID. 없거나 SAINT 미연동이면 loginUrl과 함께 AUTH_REQUIRED를 반환."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context: it requires an authenticated student, returns official regulation basis, and safely binds to the current transport session when mcp_session_id is omitted. No contradiction with 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?
Two concise sentences: the first front-loads the core purpose, and the second provides a useful default behavior. There is no filler or redundant expansion.
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 description gives the core purpose and session behavior, but does not differentiate from the closely related sibling check_graduation_requirements. With no output schema, it also leaves the exact return shape somewhat underspecified, though 'status + official basis' gives a basic idea.
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%, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates the mcp_session_id fallback already documented in the schema and adds no new meaning for live or question parameters.
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 action and resource: returning an authenticated student's u-SAINT graduation requirement status together with official policy/regulation basis. It clearly conveys what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tool check_graduation_requirements.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus check_graduation_requirements or other policy-related siblings. The only usage hint is the mcp_session_id fallback behavior, which concerns parameter handling rather than tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.