Ottieni Materie Disponibili

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds the valuable detail that values are 'live' and not hardcoded, which is behavioral info beyond the annotations. However, it does not discuss potential errors, return formatting, or dependencies on UI state, though the output schema covers some of this.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the main action and includes a useful qualifier. Every word adds value, with no fluff or repetition.

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-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description is sufficient: it identifies the data source and that it's live. Minor gap: it doesn't mention whether a valid BDP session is required, but sibling tools like verifica_sessione may cover that.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the description carries no parameter documentation burden. With no params to describe, the baseline is 4 and the description is not missing anything.

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 ('Estrae'), a specific resource ('materie disponibili dal select della ricerca BDP'), and a key behavioral qualifier ('live, non hardcoded'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ottieni_distretti, which retrieve different data.

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 fetch the subject options for the BDP search select, but it does not explicitly explain when to use it versus alternatives or note any prerequisites (e.g., session validity). It provides context but no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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