search_bus_stopSearch bus stops by name to retrieve the stop ID required for querying arrivals.
정류소 이름으로 정류소 ID(bsId)를 찾는다. get_bus_arrivals를 쓰기 전에 먼저 호출해서 bsId를 확보한다. 예: '동대구역', '반월당' 같은 키워드로 검색.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | 최대 건수 (기본 5) | |
| query | Yes | 정류소 이름 키워드 (예: '동대구역') |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (search by name, return bsId) but does not mention potential multiple matches, ordering, or error behavior. It is adequate but not rich.
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 two sentences that front-load the purpose and then the usage workflow. Every word earns its place with no 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?
For a simple search tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, the workflow (before get_bus_arrivals), and an example. It does not elaborate on limit behavior or response format, but these are minor gaps.
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 both parameters are already described. The description adds only an example keyword, which mirrors the schema. No additional semantic meaning is provided beyond the 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 states a specific verb (찾는다) and resource (정류소 ID(bsId)) by stop name, and explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by naming get_bus_arrivals as the downstream consumer. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous.
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 explicitly instructs to call this before get_bus_arrivals to obtain bsId, giving a clear usage context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it versus search_bus_route, but the stop-vs-route distinction is implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.