officiele_bekendmakingen_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=true (possible broad results). The description adds that it searches multiple publication types and allows filtering, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, what happens on no results, or the nature of the search algorithm. The behavioral transparency beyond annotations is moderate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and key usage instructions. It is concise and contains no unnecessary words. However, given the complexity of 12 parameters, it could be more efficient by listing parameter functionalities in a structured way.

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?

Despite having annotations, the description fails to cover many aspects of the tool's behavior and parameters. With 12 parameters and no output schema, the description should explain pagination (top, limit, offset, startRecord), the meaning of dryRun and verbose, and output format options. The current description is too sparse for a complete understanding.

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 meaning for three filter parameters (type, authority, date range) by mentioning them explicitly. However, with schema coverage only 8% (only query described), the description should explain many other parameters like top, limit, offset, dryRun, verbose, outputFormat, which are left unexplained. This is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 Dutch official publications and lists specific types (Staatscourant, Staatsblad, etc.). The verb 'Search' and resource 'Officiële Bekendmakingen' are explicit. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like 'wetten_bwb_search' or 'overheid_api_register_search', though the listing of publication types provides some distinction.

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 legal/policy topic keywords and mentions optional filters (type, authority, date range). This gives some context for when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. For example, if one needs a specific record, 'officiele_bekendmakingen_record_get' would be more appropriate, but this is not mentioned.

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