legal_horizon_digest

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

The description mentions routing through the domain-agent dispatcher with JWT/tenant/company scope, which provides some behavioral context. However, it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, if it modifies data, or any side effects. With no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 short and front-loaded with the primary action. The second sentence on routing is slightly extraneous but not overly verbose. It earns its place by providing auth context.

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 does not explain what the tool returns or the nature of the output, despite an output schema being present. For an action that likely produces a digest or report, this omission leaves the agent uncertain about the result. Incomplete for the tool's complexity.

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 adds basic meaning to the parameters: 'message' is a free-text objective, 'inputs' is an optional JSON string. This goes beyond the empty schema descriptions, but it lacks details on expected formats or examples. Given 0% schema coverage, the added value is moderate.

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 states the tool runs the 'horizon_digest' action, but it does not explain what that action does (e.g., digest legal horizon updates). The verb 'run' and resource are clear, but the purpose is vague without understanding the action's outcome.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus other legal tools like legal_horizon_scan or legal_horizon_subscribe. The description does not provide context for appropriate usage or alternatives.

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