Search the California Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) public-discipline records — judges censured, admonished, or removed for misconduct. Source: cjp.ca.gov public decisions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | Free-text query against any field |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the records are public and sourced from cjp.ca.gov, which implies read-only access. However, it does not mention pagination, response format, or query behavior beyond the schema, leaving gaps in behavioral transparency.
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 single sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Search', and includes only essential information about the source and content. There is no wasted text or redundant repetition of schema details.
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 tool is simple with two parameters, but there is no output schema or annotations. The description explains the scope and source adequately for basic invocation, but it does not describe the return structure, pagination, or any additional behavior that an agent might need to know, making it only partially complete.
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 only 50%, with 'query' documented but 'limit' lacking a description. The tool description provides no parameter details, so it does not compensate for the incomplete schema. The limit parameter's meaning is somewhat inferred from its name and constraints, but the description adds no value.
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 searches California CJP public-discipline records, with a specific verb ('Search') and resource. It lists the types of records (censured, admonished, or removed) and cites the source, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_judges or search_capost.
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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: when searching for public judicial discipline records from California CJP. It implies usage for misconduct-related queries but does not explicitly state exclusions or name alternative tools for general judge information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_* retrieves specific records, search_* queries databases, top_* provides rankings, and list_* enumerates metadata. The overlap between search_cjp and search_cjp_documents is explicitly resolved in their descriptions.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscore separators: get_, search_, list_, top_. The pluralization of search_das vs get_da matches the function, and search_capost is a clear abbreviation.
15 tools is well within the ideal range for a public-records server covering four entity types. Each tool earns its place, covering retrieval, search, ranking, and metadata listing without unnecessary bloat.
The surface covers the full read-only workflow: discover databases, search records, retrieve full details, rank by severity, and navigate site pages. No obvious gaps exist for the stated purpose of exposing California justice system records.