se_dp_search_guidelines

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

No annotations exist, so the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It mentions document types and topics but lacks details on read-only nature, authorization, rate limits, error handling, or result behavior (e.g., pagination). This leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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, well-structured sentence using a colon to list document types and topics. It is front-loaded with the core action ('Search IMY guidance documents') and contains no unnecessary 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?

Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers the tool's subject but omits key execution details like result format, pagination, required authentication, or how to use filters effectively. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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% with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds examples of search topics (e.g., 'kamerabevakning', 'cookies') and guidance types, which provides context beyond the schema but does not substantially augment parameter understanding.

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 it searches IMY guidance documents (vägledningar, riktlinjer, ställningstaganden) covering GDPR implementation, DPIA methodology, etc. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like se_dp_search_decisions (legal decisions) and se_dp_get_guideline (single document retrieval).

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 searching guidance documents but does not provide explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives. No exclusions or context for when-not-to-use is given, though sibling tool names offer some implicit differentiation.

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