search_legislation

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination, or return format, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.

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?

Single sentence is highly concise and front-loaded with key purpose. No wasted words, but could include structured details without harming conciseness.

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?

Tool has no output schema and minimal parameters. Description does not explain return format, result types, or error handling. For a search tool, this leaves significant gaps in agent 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the tool description adds no explanation for parameters. The 'query' parameter is not described (e.g., free text vs. citation), and 'limit' is merely numeric. Agent cannot infer proper usage from description alone.

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's action ('Search') and specific resource ('official Luxembourg legislation and consolidated laws through Legilux'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling search tools (e.g., search_datasets, search_statistics) which target different domains.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the presence of sibling search tools for other data types, explicit context on scope and exclusions would be valuable but is absent.

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