list_acts

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, or return format. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden, but it only states the purpose without behavioral details. However, for a parameterless listing tool, the lack of behavioral information is less critical.

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 a single sentence, which is concise. However, it is in Polish, which may not be ideal for English-language agents. The structure is front-loaded and efficient, but language consideration reduces the score slightly.

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 zero parameters and the presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description is complete enough. It states the tool lists codes for verify_article, which is sufficient for the agent to understand the tool's role. No additional requirements are needed.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema covers 100% (no parameters). The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not add parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, which is appropriate.

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 lists supported act codes (PL+EU) for verify_article. The name 'list_acts' is a verb+resource, and the sibling tool verify_article provides context, distinguishing this listing function from verification.

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 implies the tool is used to get codes for verify_article, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or provide alternatives. The context is clear from the sibling tool, but no explicit guidance such as 'use this tool to retrieve codes before calling verify_article' is given.

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