e-Stat MCP

get_data_catalog_csv

Read-only

Retrieve e-Stat data catalog listings as CSV by converting JSON responses, enabling direct spreadsheet import.

Instructions

データカタログ情報をCSVで取得する.

e-Stat API 3.0にはデータカタログのCSVエンドポイントがないため、 JSON版getDataCatalogのデータカタログ行をMCP側でCSVへ変換する。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`gov_code`	No
`open_years`	No
`stats_code`	No
`search_word`	No
`stats_field`	No
`survey_years`	No
`updated_date`	No
`start_position`	No
`stats_name_list`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.4.0Aug 25, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
First observedDec 8, 2025

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the behavior of fetching JSON data and converting it to CSV, which is a meaningful operational detail. However, it does not disclose other behaviors like response size, pagination, or performance implications of the conversion. This aligns with the get_calls calibration example—adds scoping (conversion) but lacks richer behavioral context.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two sentences with zero waste. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides essential context (why the CSV is generated). Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and the conversion logic but is incomplete given the complexity: 10 parameters with no schema descriptions and an output schema (CSV) that is not detailed. An agent cannot correctly construct a call without understanding parameter semantics. The lack of any parameter guidance makes this inadequate for effective use.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the description is the only source of parameter meaning, yet it mentions none of the 10 parameters (limit, gov_code, open_years, etc.). An agent has no guidance on what these parameters control. The description fails entirely to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, making this a significant gap for a tool with this many parameters.

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 clearly states the action (取得する/retrieve), the resource (データカタログ情報/data catalog info), and the output format (CSV). It distinguishes itself from the sibling get_data_catalog by explicitly mentioning CSV conversion and referencing the JSON version, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explains the rationale for the tool (no CSV endpoint in e-Stat API 3.0, so conversion is done MCP-side), implying that this tool is used when CSV output is needed. It indirectly references the JSON alternative (getDataCatalog) but does not explicitly state 'use this instead of get_data_catalog for CSV' or mention any other condition. The context is clear, but explicit exclusions are absent.

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

Deploy Server