get_energy_label

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation but does not state authentication requirements beyond the credential hint, potential error conditions, rate limits, or the response format. Significant gaps for a tool with no structured safety 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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the purpose immediately. However, its brevity is more under-specification than effective conciseness, though it remains efficient.

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 tool with two optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what the tool returns, how the parameters relate to the energy label lookup, or what the credential configuration implies. An agent cannot reliably invoke this tool correctly.

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 no descriptions (0% coverage) and the description does not mention the parameters 'query' and 'addressId' at all. The agent receives zero guidance on how to fill these fields or what they represent, making correct invocation very difficult.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get the official energy label'. It also includes the Danish term for disambiguation. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_buildings or get_valuation, though the unique purpose is evident.

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 only mentions a prerequisite condition ('when EMOData credentials are configured') but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_address or resolve_property. It lacks any context for selection.

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