get_admin_rule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, error handling for invalid IDs, or rate limits. The short description offers minimal insight beyond the basic action.

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, concise sentence. It includes a category label in brackets for context. While it could be structured differently, it is not verbose and front-loads the key 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?

For a simple retrieval tool, the description is somewhat complete. However, it does not specify the return format or mention that it returns the full text. Given the lack of output schema and many sibling tools, additional context would be beneficial.

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 100%; both parameters have clear descriptions. The main description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema fully captures parameter semantics.

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 retrieves the full text of an administrative rule ('행정규칙 전문 조회'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_admin_rule' which returns a list, and other get_ tools for different document types.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided in the description. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., need an ID from search_admin_rule) or when to use alternatives. The parameter description for 'id' implies the ID comes from search, but the main description lacks this context.

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