Regole di accessibilità (WCAG 2.1 AA / AgID)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds behavioral context: mandates Bootstrap Italia 2.x markup, requires conforming to the accessibility notes, and explicitly prohibits generic Bootstrap, Tailwind, or non-conforming markup. This is strong normative behavioral guidance beyond what any annotation would have provided.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and adds the design-system+markup constraint in the same paragraph. While the all-caps 'SEMPRE' is emphatic, every sentence carries meaningful operational guidance with no filler.

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?

For a zero-required-param, single-filter, no-output-schema tool, the description adequately covers purpose, usage timing, and compliance constraints. It doesn't describe the return format, but the absence of an output schema is offset by the clear behavioral contract about Bootstrap Italia compliance and accessibility rules.

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 coverage is 100%, giving the baseline of 3. The description adds value by mentioning specific topic examples (form, colore, heading, landmark, focus, immagini) consistent with the filter parameter, reinforcing how topics can be used. It clarifies the parameter is a filter dimension without repeating schema details.

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 states a specific verb ('Restituisce') and resource ('regole di accessibilità trasversali'), and clarifies it applies to every PA interface. It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing accessibility rules rather than component lookup, though it doesn't explicitly name the alternative tools for other needs.

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 clear when-to-use guidance ('Consulta questo tool prima di consegnare una UI') and when it applies (every PA interface). It implicitly differentiates from component tools by focusing on transversal accessibility constraints, but doesn't explicitly state exclusions or name alternatives.

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