parliament_votes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses useful behavior such as newest-first ordering, party filtering only where recorded, and result values, but it does not cover permissions, pagination beyond limit, or the omitted legislature parameter.

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 front-loaded and compact, with a clear Args list that avoids repetition. It is appropriately sized for a retrieval tool, though the Args formatting is slightly mechanical.

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 tool has six parameters, no annotations, and an output schema. The description covers purpose and most filters, but it omits legislature and provides no usage alternatives, leaving clear gaps for an agent selecting and invoking the 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents five of six parameters with examples and formats, but it completely omits the legislature parameter, leaving a meaningful gap.

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 a specific resource and content: recent plenary votes with each parliamentary group's position. It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as parliament_search or parliament_initiative.

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 explains what each filter does but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or named sibling tools to route the agent.

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