tweede_kamer_search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering safety. The description adds that it is an 'OData search', implying query capabilities, but doesn't disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or how open world results work. It provides minimal behavioral context beyond 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loading purpose and a usage hint. Every sentence earns its place with no superfluous text. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity level.

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 the tool has 11 parameters, only 1 required, no output schema, and very low schema description coverage (9%), the description is insufficient. It omits explanations for most parameters, pagination, output formats, and the entity parameter. The context is incomplete for an effective tool invocation.

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 only 9% (only 'query' has a schema description). The description mentions 'topic keywords' for query and 'OData filter/orderby' for those parameters, but many parameters (top, skip, limit, dryRun, entity, offset, verbose, outputFormat) remain unexplained. The description adds very little to parameter understanding 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 it performs an 'advanced OData search' on Tweede Kamer entities, listing examples (Document, Zaak, Kamerstuk). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'tweede_kamer_documents' which likely do simpler listing. However, it doesn't specify the complete set of entities or explicitly differentiate from all related sibling tools.

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 a usage hint ('Use topic keywords and optionally OData filter/orderby expressions') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., specific entity search tools like 'tweede_kamer_members'). No when-not conditions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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