Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
korean-law-alio-mcp

korean-law-alio-mcp

by scvcoder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_term_articles

Search Korean legislation for articles containing a specific legal term. Provide the term and desired number of results to retrieve relevant statutory clauses.

Instructions

[지식베이스] 용어 사용 조문 목록.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "term": "<term>",
      "display": "<display>"
    },
    "name": "get_term_articles"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
termYes검색할 법령용어
displayYes결과 수 (기본:20)
apiKeyNo법제처 Open API 인증키(OC). 사용자가 제공한 경우 전달

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the function without mentioning side effects, authentication needs (though apiKey implies it), rate limits, or other behavioral traits.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the key information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is too sparse. It does not provide sufficient context for an AI agent to decide when to use this tool.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema has 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema descriptions, which already explain each parameter adequately.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool lists articles using the term, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools that also deal with terms or articles, like search_legal_terms or get_article_detail.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many similar sibling tools, the description should indicate scenarios or limitations, but it offers no such context.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools