e-Stat MCP

get_stats_data_csv

Read-only

Retrieve Japan's official statistical data as CSV by specifying a stats data ID, with options to filter by area, time, and categories for analysis.

Instructions

統計データをCSVで取得する.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`cdarea`	No
`cdtime`	No
`cdcat01`	No
`cdcat02`	No
`cdcat03`	No
`lvcat01`	No
`lvcat02`	No
`lvcat03`	No
`lvcat04`	No
`lvcat05`	No
`lvcat06`	No
`lvcat07`	No
`lvcat08`	No
`lvcat09`	No
`lvcat10`	No
`lvcat11`	No
`lvcat12`	No
`lvcat13`	No
`lvcat14`	No
`lvcat15`	No
`cnt_get_flg`	No
`stats_data_id`	Yes
`start_position`	No
`section_header_flg`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.4.0Aug 25, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / section_header_flg / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- changedInput schema / properties / section_header_flg / default
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / section_header_flg / type
```
Removed value: -"boolean"
```
First observedDec 8, 2025

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description provides no behavioral details beyond the annotated readOnlyHint. It does not disclose pagination, rate limits, response format specifics, or what happens with filtering parameters. The annotation covers the read-only nature, but the description adds no additional context, leaving the agent uninformed about important operational behaviors.

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 description is extremely concise (one sentence) and front-loads the core purpose. However, it lacks any structure such as examples, constraints, or parameter hints. While brevity is good, this is under-specified for a tool with many parameters, making it more under-specification than true conciseness.

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?

Given the complexity (25 parameters), the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain return format, pagination, filtering behavior, or how it differs from siblings. Even with an output schema present, the description provides almost no context to guide correct usage. The tool cannot be effectively invoked without external knowledge.

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?

The input schema has 25 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description gives no explanation of any parameter. Without any guidance, the agent cannot correctly interpret the meaning or usage of parameters like cdarea, cdtime, lvcat01-15, or flags like cnt_get_flg. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema clarity.

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 a specific verb (取得する - retrieve) and resource (統計データ - statistical data) with the format (CSV), making the core purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_stats_data or get_stats_data_bulk, which could share similar functionality.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, conditions, or cases where this tool is preferred over siblings such as get_stats_data (possibly JSON format) or get_stats_data_bulk.

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

Deploy Server