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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral details: it returns documents from the last N days, sorted by publication date (newest first), and explains the urgency_max logic (1=critical, 2=high). This goes beyond the annotations, though it doesn't discuss authentication or rate limits.

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 concise and front-loaded: a one-sentence purpose, a brief use-case statement, and a clean Args list. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or repetition.

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 read-only tool with four optional parameters, the description covers the purpose, the timing scope, the sort order, and the meaning of each parameter. An output schema exists, so return values are not the description's responsibility. This is complete for the tool's 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?

The schema has no descriptions for properties, but the description's Args section provides clear explanations for all four parameters: days (look back N days, default 7), entity_type (filter by code), regulation (filter by family code), and urgency_max (at or above this urgency). This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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's purpose with a specific verb+resource: 'Get recently published or updated regulatory documents.' It also positions itself as a 'Shortcut for what is new this week,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_regulations or get_document.

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 usage context ('Useful for weekly regulatory briefings') and explains the lookback window and sorting. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, though the context is sufficient for most cases.

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