Ottieni Precedenti Conformi/Difformi

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint true, covering safety. The description adds the source context (detail page) but does not disclose additional behaviors such as output format, error handling, or rate limits. It is consistent with annotations but does not go beyond them.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple list-extraction tool with read-only annotations and two well-defined parameters, the description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it. It lacks details about the output structure or any prerequisites, but given the tool's apparent simplicity, these gaps are minor.

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 schema describes the 'url' parameter and provides an enum for 'tipo', but lacks a description for 'tipo'. The description's mention of 'conformi e/o difformi' clarifies the purpose of the tipo parameter, and the enum itself gives valid choices. The URL parameter is well-covered by the schema, so overall the semantics are adequate but not fully enriched.

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 uses the specific verb 'Estrae' (extracts) and identifies the resource as 'precedenti conformi e/o difformi' from the 'pagina dettaglio di un abstract BDP'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ottieni_materie and ottieni_timeline, which target 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 specifies the context: the tool operates on the detail page of a BDP abstract, implying a URL input. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria, though the clear context is a sufficient guide.

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