Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
opendart-fss-mcp

opendart-fss-mcp

by hypn4
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

event_dissolution_reason

Read-only

Retrieve the dissolution reason for a Korean corporation using its unique corporate code. Optionally filter by date range to find when and why a company was dissolved.

Instructions

해산 사유를 조회합니다.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "corp_code": "<corp_code>"
    },
    "name": "event_dissolution_reason"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
corp_codeYes고유번호 (8자리)
bgn_deNo시작일 (YYYYMMDD)
end_deNo종료일 (YYYYMMDD)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a read operation. However, the description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., scope, pagination, or response format) that would aid in tool selection.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, focused sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and clear, though minimal.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the presence of an output schema and the simplicity of the tool (3 parameters, no nested objects), the description is adequate but could be improved by mentioning what the output contains or the scope of the query.

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?

The input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (corp_code, bgn_de, end_de) at 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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?

The description states '해산 사유를 조회합니다' which clearly indicates the tool retrieves dissolution reasons. It distinguishes itself from sibling event_* tools by specifying the resource (dissolution reason) and action (inquiry).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 (e.g., other event query tools like event_merger_decision). There is no mention of context or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools