discover_apis

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the registry covers a verified subset of 276+ endpoints, explains matching criteria (Korean/English name, category, etc.), and notes the return format (endpoints grouped by category).

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 well-structured with Korean and English sections, workflow steps, when-to-use, args, and returns. It is slightly longer than necessary but every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the low complexity (1 optional param) and presence of an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, and limitations (verified subset, link to full catalog). No gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description must compensate. It explains that keyword matches against multiple fields and that omitting it returns all endpoints grouped by category, adding meaning beyond the simple string/null type.

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 clearly states it searches the registry of verified Korean National Assembly API endpoints to find endpoint codes before calling query_assembly. It differentiates from sibling tools by specifying its role in the workflow (discover before query).

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?

Explicitly describes when to use: to explore available endpoints, find a specific endpoint code, or see all endpoints by category. Also includes a fallback instruction if the endpoint is not found in the registry.

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