Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• boe_get_articleB
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It mentions getting full text and detecting cross-references but omits details on read-only nature, authentication, or response format.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence that efficiently conveys the main action and additional detection feature. No fluff, but could be slightly more structured.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Lacks output schema and annotations. Does not explain the cross-reference detection output or provide sufficient context for an AI agent to understand the response format, making it incomplete for a specialized tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes both parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what is in the schema, meeting baseline.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool retrieves the full text of a BOE article and detects cross-references, distinguishing it from siblings like boe_search (search) and boe_get_relationships (relationships).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for retrieving article text but does not specify scenarios or when not to use it.

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

• boe_searchB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It mentions relaxed search but does not disclose read-only status, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior. For a search tool, this is insufficient.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is very concise: two sentences with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the primary purpose and adds key detail about relaxed search in the second sentence. Highly efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context about return format, error handling, and usage scenarios. It explains a key feature but leaves out essential completeness for practical use.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds the nuance of relaxed search behavior for the 'q' parameter but does not explain 'limit' usage beyond its schema description. No additional meaning beyond schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool searches consolidated legislation in the BOE (Spanish Official State Gazette). It distinguishes from siblings like boe_get_article and boe_search_recent_summaries by focusing on normative search and mentioning relaxed search capability.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies when to use: for searching consolidated legislation, with a fallback to relaxed search if exact terms fail. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool versus siblings like boe_search_recent_summaries, providing only implicit guidance.

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

• boe_get_relationshipsA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the output (extracting relationships) but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, or limitations. The tool's mutability is not addressed.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that succinctly states the tool's purpose and importance. Every word adds value, with no wasted space or repetition.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema) and no annotations, the description is adequate but lacks detail on the format of returned relationships and differentiation from sibling tools. It leaves some context gaps for an agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'id', and the schema already provides description and example. The tool description adds no extra parameter-specific information, so it meets the baseline of 3.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool analyzes a document to extract legal relationships, specifying which laws it modifies, repeals, or affects. This verb+resource combination is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like boe_search or boe_get_article.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for in-depth analysis with 'Esencial para análisis profundo', but does not explicitly state when to use vs. alternatives like boe_search or boe_get_article. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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

• boe_search_recent_summariesA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  The description mentions 'exhaustively' but provides no details on return format, pagination, rate limits, or side effects. Since annotations are absent, more behavioral context would be beneficial.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is concise—only two sentences—with the main action in the first sentence and additional context in the second, containing no superfluous information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and scope adequately, though it omits details on result format or limitations.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no extra meaning to the parameters; the schema already documents 'days' and 'keyword' adequately, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly specifies the action (thoroughly scans), resource (summaries of the last N days), and scope (searching for keywords), distinguishing it from siblings like 'boe_search' which likely searches all documents.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  It indicates usefulness for finding hidden announcements ('Útil para encontrar anuncios ocultos') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'boe_search' or when not to use it.

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