get_us_statute_section

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (citation, title hierarchy, breadcrumb, links to HTML/PDF/XML) and cost (1 credit). This is sufficient for a read-only metadata lookup, though it does not mention authorization requirements or rate limits.

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 three sentences, each serving a purpose: main action, provenance of the parameter, output summary, and usage tip with cost. No redundant information, and the essential information is front-loaded.

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 a single parameter, an output schema (implied by the return description), and sibling tools, this description fully covers the tool's behavior and context. It explains what the tool returns, how to use it in a workflow, and its cost, leaving no major gaps.

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 only parameter, act_id, is well-documented in the schema with description and examples. The description adds value by explaining that the act_id is obtained from search_us_statutes or ask_legal_question, which is actionable context beyond the schema.

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 retrieves metadata for a specific US statute or regulation section using an act_id, distinguishing it from sibling tool get_us_statute_section_text which retrieves full text. It also specifies that the act_id comes from search_us_statutes or ask_legal_question sources, providing clear scope.

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 advises using this tool before get_us_statute_section_text to preview a section, offering ordering guidance. It also explains where the act_id originates, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives beyond the sibling text tool.

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