Find bills with similar titles via deterministic trigram similarity, across jurisdictions. Labeled 'derived' -- not an official cross-reference or companion-bill designation.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| bill_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description discloses deterministic algorithm, cross-jurisdiction scope, and derived labeling, adding behavioral context beyond a bare read operation.
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?
Two efficient sentences front-load the action and include a crucial caveat, with no waste.
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 no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for a simple tool, but lacks details on output format.
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 0%, and the description does not describe the parameters (bill_id, limit) beyond the schema, failing to add 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 finds bills with similar titles using trigram similarity, across jurisdictions, distinguishing it from siblings like search_legislation.
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 implies use for title similarity matching but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs siblings like get_bill_record or search_legislation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
