senado_buscar_legislacao

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds behavioral context: returns structure { count, normas } with specific fields, and that it returns error if no parameters. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Description is concise with 4 sentences, each adding value: main function, output, constraint, and links to related tools. No fluff, but could be slightly more streamlined.

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 output schema exists, the description covers the return structure, required parameters, and related tools. It does not mention pagination or sorting, but for a query tool this is acceptable. Completeness is good.

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 description coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description. The description repeats the parameter names and adds the constraint that at least one is required, but does not add deeper semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 for federal legal norms by tipo, numero, ano, or data. It specifies the resource (normas jurídicas) and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning use of codigo for senado_obter_legislacao and valid types in senado_tabelas_referencia.

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 explicitly requires at least one parameter, else returns error. It provides context on when to use this tool vs. related tools, but does not explicitly state when not to use it. The reference to sibling tools for detail and reference adds guidance.

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