kosis_indicator_search

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

The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already signal safety, and the description adds meaningful behavior: it auto-paginates through all pages and reports pages read in meta.pages. No side effects are claimed, so there is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 compact and well structured, with a purpose statement, a usage distinction, a pagination warning, and an Args list. It is slightly repetitive in emphasizing the indicator-vs-table distinction, but all sentences carry useful information.

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 covers key usage context and pagination, but with no output schema it does not describe the returned item fields or structure beyond meta.pages. An agent would still need to infer what an indicator result object contains and how to use the returned IDs with related tools.

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?

Although the schema has no descriptions, the Args section explains all three parameters: name with examples, jipyo_id as a direct-ID alternative, and max_records as the maximum number of returned items. It also clarifies that either name or jipyo_id should be supplied, which is important operational guidance.

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 tool's purpose: finding major KOSIS indicators by name, and explicitly distinguishes this from the statistical-table series. It also names the sibling tool kosis_search for table-oriented searches, so an agent can disambiguate immediately.

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?

It gives concrete guidance: use kosis_search instead when working at the table level, and explains that indicator results are curated. It also describes pagination behavior, though it does not explicitly mention when to use kosis_indicator_data instead of this search tool.

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