kosis_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it adds almost nothing beyond the schema. It does not disclose result shape, pagination limits, whether results are ranked, or any cost/rate behavior for a tool that hits an external search endpoint.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the routing condition, with no filler.

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?

Covers purpose and a rough usage condition, but for a search tool with no output schema the description omits anything about what results look like or how to page through them. Adequate but with clear 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 description coverage is 100%, so page, sort, count, query and org_id are already fully documented in the schema. The description only restates that 기관·정렬·페이지 are specifiable, adding no format or syntax detail beyond it.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (실행한다 / KOSIS 통합검색) and frames it as the direct search entry point. The clause about finding tables not in the catalog hints at a distinction from catalog-oriented siblings, though it does not name them.

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?

"카탈로그에 없는 통계표를 찾을 때 씁니다" gives a when-to-use condition, which implies the catalog tools are the alternative path. However, it never names kosis_list or find_table explicitly, so the routing decision is left to inference.

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