reunion_possession_search_procurement

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

The description describes the output structure and sorting order, sufficient for a safe search tool. No annotations provided, but the description covers expected behavior without contradictions.

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?

Well-structured with two paragraphs: first explains purpose and output, second gives sibling guidance. No redundant or confusing sentences, though slightly lengthy for a search tool.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists all returned fields and notes sorting order. All 5 parameters are fully described or exemplified, making the tool's behavior completely understandable.

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%, and the description adds value by providing examples for 'nature' and 'procedure' parameters, clarifying the free-text search on 'query', and stating the default limit.

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 public-procurement contracts awarded by the Commune of La Possession in SCDL format. It lists the fields returned and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool reunion_search_boamp.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool vs. the alternative: 'For BOAMP-published notices (broader than just Possession), use reunion_search_boamp.' This provides clear usage boundaries.

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