Retrieve saved Korean writing style bundles, such as separate sets for company documents and personal blogs, so you can choose the right style for a draft.
만들어 둔 문체 묶음 목록(회사용 · 개인 블로그용처럼 나눠 둔 경우).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the concept of grouped style bundles, but no additional behavioral context such as ordering, pagination, or what the listing contains.
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?
A single concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation, though it omits any structural detail beyond the parenthetical example.
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 tool has no parameters, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description is near complete. The only notable gap is the lack of when-to-use guidance relative to sibling list operations.
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?
Zero parameters, so the description has nothing to compensate for and the schema is fully documented. Baseline 4 applies for a no-param tool.
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 ('list' + 'styles'), and the parenthetical clarifies that styles are grouped into bundles/categories. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_writing_kinds, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with 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?
The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_my_style_guide or list_writing_kinds. No exclusions, prerequisites, or contexts are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.