HORIZON SHIELD KIRA

Search Cost Category

search_cost_category

Read-only

Finds construction-cost categories by Japanese work name or keyword and returns matching categories with red-flag counts and priority for auditing quotes.

Instructions

工事名・キーワードで建設費カテゴリを検索する(例: 外壁塗装, 浴室, 給湯器, 雨漏り)。該当カテゴリと整備済みの赤旗件数・優先度を返す。 / Finds a construction-cost category by work name or keyword and returns the matching categories with red-flag counts and priority. Japan-specific; a Japanese query works best (e.g. 外壁塗装 exterior painting, 浴室 bathroom).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	工事名やキーワード(日本語)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	No	How many records matched. 0 means the source was read and nothing matched. It never means the source could not be read, that returns isError: true.
`lookup`	No	ok = the source was read and something matched. absent = the source was read and nothing matched. A source that could NOT be read never appears here: that returns isError: true and makes no claim about what does or does not exist.
`source_read`	No	true on every successful result. A failed lookup does not return a result at all, so this is never false, it is declared so a consumer can assert on it.
`did_you_mean`	No	Near matches, when an exact match was not found.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.11Oct 1, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties

Added value: +{
+  "count": {
+    "description": "How many records matched. 0 means the source was read and nothing matched. It never means the source could not be read, that returns isError: true.",
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "did_you_mean": {
+    "description": "Near matches, when an exact match was not found."
+  },
+  "lookup": {
+    "description": "ok = the source was read and something matched. absent = the source was read and nothing matched. A source that could NOT be read never appears here: that returns isError: true and makes no claim about what does or does not exist.",
+    "enum": [
+      "ok",
+      "absent"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "source_read": {
+    "description": "true on every successful result. A failed lookup does not return a result at all, so this is never false, it is declared so a consumer can assert on it.",
+    "type": "boolean"
+  }
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1Aug 19, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "工事名・キーワードに該当したカテゴリと、整備済み赤旗件数・優先度。 / Matched cost category with red-flag count and priority.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds beyond that by specifying that it returns matching categories with red-flag counts and priority, and notes the Japan-specific nature. This gives the agent a clearer picture of the tool's output without contradicting annotations. A score of 4 acknowledges this added context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences (in both Japanese and English) that are front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by examples. There is no redundant filler, and the structure effectively conveys the key information in a compact form. Achieves a perfect score for conciseness and clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With only one parameter, no nested objects, and an existing output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the search behavior, examples, and return value highlights (red-flag counts and priority). The tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema mean no additional context is necessary.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with a simple description (工事名やキーワード), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing concrete example queries (外壁塗装, 浴室, 給湯器) and clarifying that Japanese keywords work best, which helps the agent form effective queries. This enrichment justifies one point above baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Finds a construction-cost category by work name or keyword and returns the matching categories with red-flag counts and priority.' It uses a specific verb ('finds') and identifies the resource (construction-cost category) plus what it returns. It also gives concrete examples (外壁塗装, 浴室) that help distinguish it from siblings like list_cost_categories, which presumably lists all categories without a search query.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage: use this tool when you need to search by a work name or keyword rather than listing all categories. It provides examples of suitable queries and notes that Japanese queries work best, which gives practical guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like list_cost_categories or state when NOT to use this tool, so it stops short of a perfect score.

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

Deploy Server