find_statuteSearch Korean statutes, enforcement decrees, and rules by title (with abbreviation expansion) or body keyword, returning statute names ready for provision lookup.
법령명(줄임말 자동 확장) 또는 본문 키워드로 법률·시행령·시행규칙을 찾습니다. 결과의 법령명을 read_provision 등에 그대로 넘기면 됩니다.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes | 법령명 또는 본문 키워드 | |
| scope | No | title=법령명 검색, body=조문 본문 검색 | title |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the general read-only annotations, the description adds the crucial detail that law names (abbreviations) are automatically expanded. This is a specific functional trait that significantly helps the agent understand the tool's capability.
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 extremely concise, using two efficient sentences to cover what it finds, how to input it, and how to use the output with other tools.
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 is highly complete for a search tool by specifying the range of laws found (statutes, decrees, rules) and the practical implication of the results (direct pass-through to the reader tool).
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?
The description clarifies the semantic difference in the query parameter by mentioning that it can be used for either full law names or section body keywords, and adds the logic of automatic abbreviation expansion.
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 purpose is to find statutes, enforcement decrees, and rules. It distinguishes itself by specifying that it uses both law names and body keywords for searching.
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 provides clear usage instructions regarding the output: the resulting law names can be passed directly to other relevant sibling tools like read_provision. This helps an agent chain operations correctly.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.