Ottieni Timeline Gradi di Giudizio

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds that it extracts from a detail page but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as requiring an authenticated session, behavior on invalid URLs, or whether an empty timeline is returned. No contradiction with annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence. It is extremely concise with no filler words, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 extraction tool, the description provides the core action and source, but there is no output schema and no mention of the return format, preconditions (like session validity), or error cases. Given the BDP context, this leaves some gaps, though it may be sufficient for a straightforward extraction.

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 has one required 'url' parameter with format 'uri' and no description (0% coverage). The description partially compensates by indicating the URL must point to a detail page of a BDP provvedimento, but does not explicitly define the parameter's purpose or any additional constraints beyond the schema.

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) with a clear resource: "la catena dei gradi di giudizio" from the detail page of a BDP provvedimento. It distinguishes itself from siblings like leggi_dettaglio_provvedimento, which would presumably return the full detail page, and ottieni_precedenti, which handles precedents.

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?

Usage is implied: the tool should be used when one needs the chain of judgment grades from a detail page. However, there is no explicit when/when-not guidance or mention of alternative tools, despite siblings like ottieni_materie and ottieni_distretti suggesting similar extraction functions.

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