Korean Bill & Debate MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

search_speeches

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search official Korean or English speeches by query, speaker, committee, date, or meeting type, with context and citations for legislative research.

Instructions

Search official speeches in Korean or English.

    Source records are Korean. For an English request, optionally provide concise Korean search
    terms in korean_query; otherwise the built-in legislative glossary supplies common terms.
    Preserve official citations and answer the user in the language they requested. ``limit``
    is a ranked quick-selection size, never proof that the requested source scope is complete;
    use the durable research workflow for a complete candidate map and explicit traversal.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes
`date_to`	No
`speaker`	No
`committee`	No
`date_from`	No
`korean_query`	No
`meeting_type`	No
`organization`	No
`speaker_role`	No
`assembly_term`	No
`minutes_offset`	No
`include_context`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.3Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: source records are Korean, a glossary fallback exists, results are ranked rather than exhaustive, and citations must be preserved in answers. This is real transparency beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded and there's little true filler, but the middle sentences mix tool description with answer-writing instructions ('answer the user in the language they requested', 'preserve official citations') that dilute the operative content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, but for a 13-parameter search tool with zero schema coverage the description leaves most filtering behavior undocumented. An agent cannot confidently construct a scoped search from this.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

13 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, yet the description only explains limit and korean_query. Meaningful filters such as speaker, committee, meeting_type, assembly_term, date_from/date_to, minutes_offset, and include_context get no explanation anywhere, leaving an agent to guess semantics and formats.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Search official speeches in Korean or English.' That cleanly separates it from get_speech/get_speech_context siblings, though it never names them or explains the relationship explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Gives some conditional guidance — supply korean_query for English requests, and limit is only a quick-selection size. It also points to a 'durable research workflow' for completeness, but that workflow is never named as a concrete sibling tool, so the routing guidance is implied rather than actionable.

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

Deploy Server