search_consolidated_legislation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'search', which implies a read-only operation, but lacks details on pagination behavior, search semantics, result format, or any limitations. This is insufficient for a search tool with 10 parameters.

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, front-loaded with the key action and resource. It is not verbose, and every word is functionally relevant. However, its brevity limits the amount of information conveyed, though this is more a completeness issue than a conciseness issue.

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?

The description is notably incomplete for a tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. It fails to explain how parameters interact, what return values look like, or any edge cases. The one-sentence description is insufficient to fully understand the tool's behavior and expectations.

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%, so the input schema already fully documents all 10 parameters with descriptions. The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, but since the schema is comprehensive, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool searches for norms in the consolidated legislation of the BOE, specifying both the verb ('Busca') and the resource ('legislación consolidada del BOE'). This distinguishes it from sibling search tools like search_recent_boe or search_auxiliary_data by focusing specifically on consolidated legislation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It simply states what the tool does, leaving the user to infer usage context.

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