Get a MapleStory guild's unique identifier (oguild_id) by providing the guild name and world name, enabling subsequent guild data lookups.
길드 이름과 월드명으로 길드 식별자(oguild_id)를 조회합니다.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| guild_name | Yes | 길드 이름 | |
| world_name | Yes | 월드 이름 (스카니아, 베라, 루나, 리부트 등) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly indicates a read-only lookup by guild name and world name returning an identifier, which is the core behavior, but it does not describe not-found behavior or any prerequisites. For a simple lookup, this is minimally adequate.
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?
The description is a single compact sentence stating the operation, the resource, and the two input criteria with no filler or redundancy. All information is front-loaded and earns its place.
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?
For a simple two-parameter ID lookup with an output schema present, the description covers the essential information. It is slightly incomplete only because it does not explain how this tool relates to get_guild_basic or when the lookup is appropriate as a prerequisite.
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 coverage is 100%, with guild_name and world_name already described in the input schema including an example for world_name. The description references both parameters as lookup keys but adds no new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides.
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 uses a specific verb ('조회합니다' – retrieves) and names the exact resource being returned (guild identifier oguild_id) along with the two key inputs. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools that fetch character or guild detail data rather than a lookup identifier.
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?
The description gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_guild_basic, nor does it mention whether this ID is a prerequisite for other guild endpoints. Usage context must be inferred entirely from the tool name and the sibling list.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.