lt_dp_search_guidelines

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool searches documents but does not mention whether it is read-only, any authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, or what the response looks like. This is a significant gap for a tool with no output schema.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It contains no filler or redundant information, and is well front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 search tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description provides adequate context about the subject matter but lacks detail on result formatting, filtering behavior, or how to combine parameters. It is sufficient for a basic understanding but leaves gaps that could affect correct invocation.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters, providing baseline clarity. However, the description adds little beyond the schema: it lists some document types but omits 'template', and does not elaborate on how query, type, topic, or limit interact. The schema itself already defines these well.

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 action ('Search') and the resource ('VDAI guidance documents'), enumerating specific document types (recommendations, guidelines, FAQs) and scope (GDPR implementation in Lithuania). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like lt_dp_search_decisions, which searches a different resource type.

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 for guidance documents but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like lt_dp_search_decisions. The sibling names hint at the distinction, but the description itself offers no exclusions or alternative references.

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