opinet-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses '확정 수치' (finalized figures) indicating data lag/confirmation status, and '전일부터 이전 7일간' (from yesterday back 7 days) clarifying the rolling window. Missing default behavior details when parameters are omitted (though covered in schema).

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 sentences with zero waste. First sentence defines scope and data type; second states use case. Front-loaded with essential constraints (7-day range, finalized data).

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?

No output schema exists, yet description does not indicate return format (array structure, fields) or explain the semantic meaning of product codes (B027=gasoline?, etc.). Adequate for basic selection but incomplete for full invocation confidence.

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 has 100% description coverage with clear patterns (YYYYMMDD) and enum values. Description adds context for the date parameter via the 7-day window explanation, but does not elaborate on the opaque product codes (B027, D047, etc.) 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?

Clear specific verb (조회/retrieves) + resource (전국 일일 평균가격/national daily average prices) + scope (7 days from yesterday, finalized figures). The 7-day window mention distinguishes this from sibling get_national_average_price (likely single-day) and get_sido_average_price (regional).

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?

Explicitly states when to use: '가격 추세 분석에 사용하세요' (Use for price trend analysis). However, lacks explicit alternatives or exclusions—does not clarify when to use get_national_average_price instead for current-day data.

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