OpenDART MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description states it 'provides summary information' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or what format the output takes. While an output schema exists (which helps), the description itself lacks critical behavioral context for a tool with 3 required parameters.

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 reasonably concise with two parts: a purpose statement and parameter documentation. However, the purpose statement could be more front-loaded and clearer in English (the Korean may require translation). The Args section is well-structured but includes some redundancy with the schema. Overall, it's functional but not optimally efficient.

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?

Given 3 required parameters with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description does provide parameter documentation which is crucial. The existence of an output schema means the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, for a data retrieval tool with multiple similar siblings, the description lacks context about when to use it versus alternatives and behavioral details like authentication or rate limits.

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?

The description includes an Args section that documents all 3 parameters with Korean labels and format hints (e.g., '고유번호(8자리)' for corp_code, '시작일(YYYYMMDD)' for bgn_de). However, the input schema has 0% description coverage, so this parameter documentation in the description is essential. The description compensates adequately by providing format requirements, though it doesn't explain parameter relationships or provide examples.

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's purpose: '증권예탁증권 - 증권신고서 내 증권예탁증권 요약정보를 제공합니다' translates to 'Depositary receipts - provides summary information of depositary receipts within securities registration statements.' This specifies the verb (provides), resource (depositary receipts summary information), and context (within securities registration statements). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_equity_securities_reg' or 'get_debt_securities_reg' which handle similar registration data for different security types.

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. It doesn't mention sibling tools that handle similar registration data (e.g., get_equity_securities_reg, get_debt_securities_reg) or specify use cases like retrieving depositary receipt information specifically versus other security types. The only implied usage is when you need depositary receipt summary information, but no explicit context or exclusions are provided.

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