kosis_guide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds useful behavioral context by listing limitations and pitfalls, signaling that this is a meta/orientation resource rather than a data-returning operation.

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 a single front-loaded phrase with a compact list of covered topics. There is no wasted wording or redundancy with the schema or annotations.

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 no-parameter, read-only guide tool, the description is reasonably complete: it states what knowledge areas it covers and flags limitations and pitfalls. It does not describe the response format, but no output schema exists and the tool's purpose as a guide makes that less critical.

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?

The input schema is empty with 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. A baseline of 4 is appropriate because no parameter documentation is needed.

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 states this tool provides the knowledge needed to use the KOSIS API, specifically covering service view, cycle, meta types, limitations, and pitfalls. This is clear as a guide/resource, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like kosis_explain.

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 phrase 'what to know when using this API' implies the agent should consult this guide alongside or before the other kosis_* tools, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. Alternatives are not named or excluded.

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