get_key_indicator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It transparently discloses the tool's behavior: it is a retrieval operation (조회), explains the two internal services used, parameter mapping, and return structure. No contradictions or hidden behaviors.

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 well-structured with Korean overview, parameter details, return format, and an example. Every sentence adds value, and it is concise without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description fully covers usage, parameter semantics, return structure, and provides an example. It is complete and self-contained.

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 0%, but the description fully explains each parameter: 'by' values and their meaning, 'value' dependency on 'by', and defaults for 'page' and 'limit'. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 explanation data of KOSIS Key Indicator and specifies two sub-services based on the 'by' parameter. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_key_indicators, search_key_indicators, and get_key_indicator_details by focusing on explanation retrieval with ID or name lookup.

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 description explains when to use 'by' parameter with values 'id' or 'name' and provides examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like search_key_indicators for broader queries.

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