Check server metadata, dataset statistics, and content freshness to verify data coverage and provenance before relying on Finnish law search results.
Server metadata, dataset statistics, freshness, and provenance. Call this to verify data coverage, currency, and content basis before relying on results.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns metadata, statistics, freshness, and provenance. This is transparent and consistent with a read-only information tool.
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 concise sentences front-load key terms and provide actionable guidance. Every sentence earns its place.
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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It explains what the tool returns and when to use it.
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?
No parameters exist, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds meaning by explaining what the tool returns, exceeding the baseline of 4.
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 specifies 'Server metadata, dataset statistics, freshness, and provenance' and explicitly states the action 'verify data coverage, currency, and content basis'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform specific legal research functions.
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 explicitly states 'Call this to verify data coverage, currency, and content basis before relying on results', providing clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the usage guidance is strong.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.