hent_barnehage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only lists output fields and does not mention whether the operation is read-only, required permissions, rate limits, error conditions, or any side effects. The name implies a read operation, but the description lacks formal disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and output fields with no wasted words.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately lists the returned fields. It could be improved by mentioning error handling or response format, but given the simplicity, it is largely 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add additional information about the 'orgnr' parameter beyond what the schema already provides. It merely repeats the source hint, which is already in the schema.

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 verb 'hent' (get), the resource 'full detalj om én barnehage' (full details about one kindergarten), and lists specific data fields (address, coordinates, ownership, categories, contact info). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'hent_skole' and 'sok_barnehage' by specifying it retrieves detailed information for a single kindergarten.

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 usage after obtaining an organization number from 'sok_barnehage' (search), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'hent_skole'. The context is clear enough for a simple tool, but lacks an explicit when-not-to-use guide.

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