get_decision_text

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

The description discloses that when full=false (default), the body is returned in a stepwise abbreviated form, which is a significant behavioral trait beyond the read-only annotations. It does not describe other behaviors like return format or authentication.

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 line, front-loading the main purpose and including only essential usage details.

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?

The description gives the core usage pattern but leaves the domain-specific options parameter unexplained (relies on schema), and the '계단식 축약' term is vague. For a tool of this complexity, more context would help.

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 covers all parameters fully (100%). The description only restates that domain+id are needed and mentions full's effect, adding no new parameter semantics 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 clearly identifies the tool as an integrated lookup for full text across 18 domains, requiring domain and id. It is specific but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like search_decisions or get_law_text.

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 usage after acquiring domain+id and mentions the full parameter's default behavior, but it does not provide explicit when/when-not conditions or alternatives.

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