get_land_use_plan_by_pnu

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds value by specifying the integrated nature of the query (land register, zoning, assessed price), but does not detail behaviors like response size or rate limits. Given strong annotations, this is sufficient.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with tool prefix, no wasted words. However, being in Korean may reduce clarity for non-Korean agents. Overall 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?

With two parameters, no output schema, and good annotations, the description captures the main function. Lacks usage examples or return format details, but is minimally adequate for a simple query tool.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters fully (100% coverage). The description mentions PNU (19 digits) but does not add new meaning beyond schema. stdrYear is not elaborated in description. Baseline 3 as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 purpose: integrated inquiry of land register, zoning, and assessed price by PNU (19 digits). It includes a specific verb (조회) and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like exports and get_land_use_plan by emphasizing the PNU key.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_land_use_plan. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for usage.

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