kosis_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one valuable trait – automatic period-splitting when the result exceeds 40,000 cells – but says nothing about pagination, return shape, or rate/permission constraints that an agent would want for a 9-parameter data pull.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler, and the core purpose plus the key behavioral constraint (40,000-cell auto-split) are front-loaded before the sibling redirect.

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 data-retrieval tool with a fully documented 9-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose, modes, the large-result behavior, and the escape hatch to kosis_export. The main remaining gap is the shape of the returned data, which no output schema documents either.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema with format hints (e.g. YYYYMM, 'ALL'). The description only restates the period-vs-recent choice at a high level and adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (retrieving statistical table data) and scopes it to two modes, period-based or recent-N. It differentiates itself from kosis_export by routing large-row cases there, but gives no signal about how it differs from kosis_trend or kosis_table_meta.

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 offers the two invocation modes (기간 지정 또는 최근 N개 시점) and names the alternative tool (kosis_export) with the condition that selects it (행이 많으면). It stops short of stating when NOT to use this tool beyond the row-count case.

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