대한민국 공공데이터 소스 목록

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

Beyond the annotations (read-only, idempotent), the description discloses valuable behavioral traits: it operates only on local data without external network access, and it explicitly cautions about row count discrepancies (96,056 vs 87,581), preventing misinterpretation of national totals. This is rich contextual transparency.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by a data quality caveat and a scope clarification. Every sentence adds substantive value without redundancy, achieving a high signal-to-noise ratio.

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?

The description provides important context about local-only operation and data limitations, but with 7 undocumented parameters and no output schema, it leaves the agent short of understanding how to construct queries or interpret results. It is a minimally viable description for a list tool, but gaps remain in parameter and return-value coverage.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the 7 parameters (limit, offset, query, enabled, etc.). It mentions 'reference date and row count ranges' but fails to connect these to specific parameters or provide filter guidance, leaving the agent without adequate parameter meaning.

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 the action (retrieve/list), resource (static metadata sources), and scope (local runtime only, not external portals). It explicitly says 'does not access external portals,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_public_datasets.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: when needing local static metadata sources and their reference date/row count ranges. It notes it does not access external portals, implying a boundary, but does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this one.

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