Alle hoofdstukken

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only listing operation but does not explicitly mention that it returns all chapters, any limitations, or that it has no side effects. It is adequate but not highly transparent.

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 sentence that efficiently lists the key per-chapter attributes. It is slightly long but still focused and free of unnecessary verbiage.

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 provides enough context about what the tool returns (chapter summaries, paragraph counts, traffic signs, CBR level) to give a user a clear expectation. It does not specify the output format, but that is not critical for a simple list 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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to describe. The description does not need to add parameter meaning beyond the empty schema, and it correctly omits any parameter details.

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 identifies the tool as providing the eleven chapters of the theory course with per-chapter details, and the plural name 'hoofdstukken' implies a listing operation. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'list', so the purpose is inferred rather than stated directly.

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 gives context about the content (summary, paragraph count, traffic signs, level) but does not explicitly contrast this with the singular 'hoofdstuk' tool or state when to choose one over the other. The sibling tool list exists, but the description itself offers no direct usage guidance.

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