Skip to main content
Glama

search_youkou

Search corporate-led childcare subsidy guidelines to find staffing, facility, operating cost, and grant standards. Use keyword and section filters to find requirements and unit price tables.

Instructions

企業主導型保育事業費補助金実施要綱(助成金の交付条件を定めた要綱、88ページ)をキーワード検索する。職員配置・設備基準・運営費・整備費・共同利用等の助成金に関する基準はこのツールで検索。これは認可外保育施設指導監督基準(search_kantoku_kijun)の上乗せ基準である。

単価表の取得方法(重要)

別紙1(基本分単価)等の大きな単価表は、キーワード検索だけでは特定の地域区分のデータまで到達できない場合がある。 以下の手順で段階的に絞り込むこと:

  1. まず keyword で検索して該当セクション名を特定する(例: "基本分単価" → "別紙1")

  2. section パラメータでセクションを指定し、keyword に地域区分や定員区分を指定して絞り込む 例: section="別紙1", keyword="その他地域 51人", max_chars=5000

  3. それでも不足する場合は max_chars を増やす(最大10000)

主要な別紙一覧

  • 別紙1: 運営費単価一覧(①基本分単価〜⑳4歳以上児配置改善加算の全20項目を含む巨大セクション)

    • ①基本分単価、②処遇改善等加算Ⅰ、③処遇改善等加算Ⅱ、④延長保育加算、⑤夜間保育加算

    • ⑥非正規労働者受入推進加算、⑦病児保育加算(病児対応型・病後児対応型・体調不良児対応型の3類型)

    • ⑧預かりサービス加算、⑨賃借料加算、⑩保育補助者雇上強化加算、⑪防犯・安全対策強化加算

    • ⑫運営支援システム導入加算、⑬連携推進加算、⑭改修支援加算、⑮改修実施加算

    • ⑯処遇改善等加算Ⅲ、⑰障害児保育加算、⑱医療的ケア児保育支援加算、⑲3歳児配置改善加算、⑳4歳以上児配置改善加算

  • 別紙2: 処遇改善等加算Ⅰの詳細

  • 別紙3: 処遇改善等加算Ⅱの詳細

  • 別紙4: 施設利用給付費等の補助単価

  • 別紙5: 整備費(建物工事費・環境改善加算・病児保育スペース加算等)

  • 別紙6: 大規模修繕等の取扱い

  • 別紙7: (欠番または統合済み)

  • 別紙8: 処遇改善等加算Ⅲの詳細

  • 別紙9: 障害児保育加算の詳細

  • 別紙10: 医療的ケア児保育支援加算の詳細

  • 別紙11: 3歳児配置改善加算の要件

  • 別紙12: 4歳以上児配置改善加算の要件

  • 別紙13: 3歳児/4歳以上児配置改善加算額(単価表)

単価の金額を知りたい場合

基本分単価・各種加算の金額が必要な場合は、まず search_tanka ツールを使うこと。 search_tanka は構造化データとして単価を返すため、正確かつ高速。 search_youkou は要件・留意事項等のテキスト情報を確認する場合に使う。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo結果件数上限(デフォルト5、最大10)
keywordYes検索キーワード。スペース区切りでAND検索。section指定時は空文字可(セクション全文取得)。例: "職員配置", "その他地域 51人", "運営費 基準額"
sectionNoセクション名フィルタ(前方一致/部分一致)。例: "別紙1", "別紙13", "第3". keywordと組み合わせて大きなセクション内を絞り込める
max_charsNo1セクションあたりの最大出力文字数(デフォルト2000、最大10000)。大きな単価表を取得する場合は5000〜10000を指定

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses important behavioral traits: keyword search only may not reach specific data in large tables, section filtering is needed, max_chars can be increased, and the 別紙1 section is a giant section. It does not specify exact pagination or ordering behavior, but the practical constraints are well covered.

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 long, but it earns its length by providing a critical workflow and a comprehensive mapping of 別紙 sections. It is well-structured with headers and lists. Minor redundancy exists in repeatedly explaining search_tanka usage, but the organization makes the information easy to scan and act on.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is thorough: it clarifies the document being searched, the relationship to sibling tools, the section list, the workflow for large tables, and the max_chars limits. It could mention what the output actually looks like, but that gap is minor given the detailed guidance provided.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful usage semantics: empty keyword with section returns full section, max_chars 5000-10000 for big tables, keyword examples like 'その他地域 51人' for regional/capacity filtering. This goes beyond the schema descriptions and materially helps the agent.

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 explicitly states the tool searches the 企業主導型保育事業費補助金実施要綱 by keyword, and clearly distinguishes it from the related 認可外保育施設指導監督基準 which is served by search_kantoku_kijun. It names the resource, the action, and the boundaries of what is in scope.

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?

The description gives explicit, actionable instructions for when to use this tool vs search_tanka: use search_tanka for 単価の金額, and use search_youkou for 要件・留意事項等のテキスト情報. It also provides a multi-step workflow for retrieving large 単価表 sections with section and max_chars, which is concrete and useful.

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