search_moi_interpretation

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the sort behavior (최근날짜순 default), the taxItem filter set, and the corpora size (3,369건) which adds context about scope. However, it doesn't disclose pagination behavior beyond '10건 단위' (already in schema), response format, or whether this is a read-only operation - though for a search tool the read-only nature is reasonably implied.

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 compact two-sentence block that front-loads the core purpose, followed by sort and filter options. Every sentence earns its place - the 국세대비 positioning adds valuable context, and the taxItem enumeration is useful. Slightly dense but efficient for a tool with this many filter options.

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 search tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it searches, how it differs from 국세 queries, default ordering, and filter options. It could add more about result format or how results relate to get_moi_interpretation sibling, but the coverage is adequate for the tool's moderate complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents all 4 parameters. The description adds marginal value: query examples (별도합산, 부담부증여) and the complete taxItem enum list mirror code. It adds the sort default context (DATE) and page semantics but largely restates what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states it searches 행정안전부 지방세 유권해석 via OLTA, distinguishes it from 국세 질의회신 (法濟處/NTS do not have it), gives the scale (3,369건), and lists it as a distinct axis vs siblings like search_local_tax_decisions. Verb+resource+scope is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools.

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?

Description explains the default sort (DATE/최근날짜순), provides query examples (별도합산, 부담부증여), and details the taxItem filter options with all 13 세목 values. It differentiates from 국세 tools and gives clear when-to-use context, though it doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives for exclusion.

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