leychile_indice_sistematico

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: it only returns hierarchical groupings without articles, which is a key behavioral trait not covered by annotations. This helps the agent understand the tool's output 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 extremely concise with two sentences that front-load the core purpose. Every word adds value; there is no fluff or redundancy. It efficiently conveys the tool's essence.

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 having an output schema, the description lacks essential context about how to specify which code to query via parameters. Without mentioning that id_norma or numero_ley is needed, the description is insufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool. The purpose is clear, but invocation details are missing.

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 description does not mention any parameters. Although the input schema has descriptions for fields like id_norma and numero_ley, the tool description fails to add meaning beyond the schema. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate but does not, leaving parameter usage ambiguous.

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 returns an index of groupings (Libros/Títulos/Capítulos/Párrafos) without articles, specifying the resource (sistematic index) and verb (listar/obtener). It distinguishes from sibling tools that return articles or full norms, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 suggests using the tool for navigating lengthy codes without downloading full text, implying a usage context. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparisons to alternatives, leaving the agent to infer.

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