dongguk-rule-mcp

get_rule_content

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve specific articles or chapters of a law using its unique ID, with optional filters for keyword, article number, chapter, or historical version.

Instructions

LAW_ID를 이미 알고 특정 조·장만 볼 때 사용하는 보조 도구. 별표·금액표가 필요하면 lookup_dongguk_rule을 사용하세요.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`grep`	No	키워드 포함 조문
`head`	No	상위 N줄
`law_id`	Yes	LAW_ID
`article`	No	특정 조문. 예: 48, 제48조, 제10조의2, 부칙 제2조
`chapter`	No	특정 장만
`history_id`	No	HISTORY_ID (생략=최신)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	도구 실행 성공 여부
`data`	No	성공 시 구조화 결과
`tool`	Yes	실행한 도구 이름
`error`	No	실패 시 구조화 오류

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.10.0Sep 9, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / article / description

Previous value: -"특정 조문만"New value: +"특정 조문. 예: 48, 제48조, 제10조의2, 부칙 제2조"

addedInput schema / properties / article / oneOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]

removedInput schema / properties / article / type
```
Removed value: -"number"
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "성공 시 구조화 결과",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "실패 시 구조화 오류",
+      "properties": {
+        "code": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "details": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "hint": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "code",
+        "message"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "도구 실행 성공 여부",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "description": "실행한 도구 이름",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "tool"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.4.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent behavior; the description adds useful behavioral scope by indicating that only article/chapter content is returned and that tables are not included. It does not detail edge-case behavior like grep/head limits, but those are visible in the schema.

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 a single focused sentence plus one alternative pointer, with no redundant wording.

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?

The description, complete parameter schema, and annotations give enough context to call the tool correctly. It does not describe the return payload, but an output schema is indicated as present.

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?

All parameters are described in the input schema with examples, so the tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the overall article/chapter scope.

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 use case: retrieve specific articles/chapters when LAW_ID is already known, and it explicitly points to lookup_dongguk_rule for tables/amount tables, distinguishing it from a key sibling tool.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives clear when-to-use guidance (known LAW_ID, specific article/chapter view) and explicit when-not/alternative guidance for schedules and amount tables with lookup_dongguk_rule.

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

Deploy Server