Cerca Provvedimenti BDP

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond that, such as scoping constraints (e.g., date ranges, filtering), pagination behavior, or authentication requirements. It merely repeats the resource scope.

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 sentence that immediately states the action and resource without redundancy. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, making it maximally concise for its limited content.

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 high complexity (19 parameters) and absence of an output schema, the description is far too thin. It does not explain search behavior, result shape, default sorting, or how to combine filters. A tool of this complexity requires much more contextual guidance than one line.

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?

With 19 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It only hints at the 'tipo' parameter by listing 'sentenze, decreti, ordinanze', but does not explain the meanings of 'query', 'data_da', 'sort_field', or other fields. This is inadequate for correct invocation.

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 identifies the tool as a search operation for provvedimenti (sentenze, decreti, ordinanze) within a specific database (Banca Dati del Merito del Ministero della Giustizia). The verb 'Cerca' plus the resource and subtypes distinguishes it from sibling search tools like 'cerca_abstract'.

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 finding judicial decisions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'cerca_abstract' or 'naviga_archivio'. No exclusions or contextual cues are given.

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