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

No annotations are present, so the description alone must convey behavior. It only states a generic search function. It does not disclose pagination limits, default sorting, filtering behavior, or any other operational traits. The tool is likely read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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—a single short phrase—with no filler words. However, it is under-specifying for a tool with 27 parameters. While it is front-loaded, it does not provide sufficient information to justify this brevity.

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?

Given the tool's high complexity (27 parameters) and no output schema, the one-line description is severely inadequate. It explains neither the search semantics, result format, nor usage context. The parameter schema helps but cannot compensate for the lack of tool-level guidance.

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 input schema covers all 27 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the schema already provides parameter semantics. The description adds no parameter-related value, but it does not need to compensate given the schema's completeness. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clear verb+resource: 'Sök efter riksdagsdokument' (Search for riksdag documents). It is specific about the action and object. However, it does not distinguish itself from multiple sibling search tools like search_dokument_fulltext or search_anforanden, which also search document-related data.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are several sibling search tools (e.g., search_dokument_fulltext, search_anforanden) with no differentiation. No context or exclusions are mentioned.

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