get_knowledge_article

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint true. Description adds value by noting it's free, requires no API key, pre-generated, and not legal advice, which are behavioral traits not covered by 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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. First sentence states core purpose and content; second adds free usage and disclaimer. Every word serves a purpose.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and ample annotations, description sufficiently explains tool purpose, parameter meaning, output type, and behavioral context. Could briefly mention output format (e.g., whether text or URL) but still complete enough.

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 provides pattern and example for celex parameter (100% coverage). Description enhances by clarifying it's 'for one EU legal act' and that output includes Rechtsstand metadata, adding context beyond 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?

Clearly states it provides a pre-generated knowledge report for one EU legal act using a CELEX number, including Rechtsstand metadata. Distinguishes from sibling tool 'get_legal_timeline' by focusing on report content rather than timeline.

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?

Implies usage for research via 'Research tool' and 'Free — no API key required', but does not explicitly contrast with sibling or specify when not to use. No direct guidance on alternatives.

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