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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: the search is limited to already-read official sources, it searches by words and meaning, each result includes URL, title, text date, offset and snippet, and access is constrained by company role permissions. These details help the agent understand both the scope and the safety/access model.

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 three tight sentences with no wasted text. It front-loads the core purpose and follows with the most useful disambiguation and return-field context.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing the key fields returned in each hit. It also covers source scope and access constraints, so an agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 query and limit are already documented in the input schema. The description adds that search works by words and by meaning, but does not elaborate on parameter formats or limits beyond the schema baseline.

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 and resource: searching laws, regulations and standards already read from official legal sites. It also distinguishes the operation from a generic web search and explains what each hit contains, so an agent can identify the tool's role without opening the schema.

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 gives clear usage context, including that this is not a web search and that it searches content already read from official sites. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as list_legal_library or get_legal_document, so the routing guidance is strong but not complete.

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