juba_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it specifies the return format (JSON with specific fields), pagination behavior (up to 15 per page), and default values for materia and limit parameters.

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 perfectly structured and front-loaded: purpose statement first, then parameter details, then return format. Every sentence earns its place with essential information, and there's no redundancy or wasted words.

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 the tool's complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, but with output schema), the description is remarkably complete. It covers purpose, parameters with semantics and defaults, behavioral constraints, and return format - providing everything an agent needs despite the sparse structured data.

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 description adds substantial meaning beyond the bare input schema (0% coverage). It provides query examples, lists all materia options with their default, explains the limit constraint, and clarifies the return structure - all crucial information not present in 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 states the tool's purpose with specific verb ('Search') and resource ('JUBA for court decision summaries (sumarios)'), distinguishing it from siblings by focusing on keyword-based search rather than advanced search or retrieving specific fallo details.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (searching by keyword) and implies alternatives through sibling tool names, but doesn't explicitly state when to choose juba_advanced_search or juba_get_fallo instead.

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