leychile_buscar_normas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context: that it is a starting point for finding idNorma and that coverage is complete and current. No contradictions exist.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the action and scope, the second provides strategic usage context. Highly efficient.

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 that an output schema exists (not shown but indicated), the description doesn't need to detail return values. It covers essential purpose and usage context. Could briefly mention output is a list of norms, but not required. Complete enough for a search tool.

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 itself provides detailed descriptions for all parameters (tipo, cantidad, consulta, response_format). Since the schema already documents parameters adequately, the description adds no additional meaning. 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 verb 'Busca' and the resource 'normas' (laws, decrees, codes), and explicitly frames it as a starting point to locate 'idNorma'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'leychile_buscar_en_norma' which likely searches within a specific norm.

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 frames this tool as the 'punto de partida' (starting point) to locate an 'idNorma', implying it is the first step before using other tools. It also mentions 'Cobertura completa y vigente' (complete and current coverage). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative search tools, though the context is clear.

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