Unfair Dismissal Guide

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the topic and 'DEMO'; it does not explain what the tool does with the situation input, whether it returns legal text or advice, or whether it is a functional stub. 'DEMO' is a weak signal, not a behavioral explanation.

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 very short with no filler and front-loads the core domain. 'DEMO' is unexplained but does not add significant bloat. It is concise, though it sacrifices substance for brevity.

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?

Even though the tool has only one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is incomplete: it never explains the meaning of 'situation', what the output represents, or how this tool relates to the sibling guides. An agent would be guessing at invocation semantics.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention 'situation' at all. The lone parameter is optional and nullable, so an agent cannot tell what format, detail level, or type of scenario is expected. The description completely fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 names a specific subject (Kenya unfair dismissal rights) and legal basis (Employment Act 2007), which distinguishes it from sibling labor law tools like maternity_paternity_rights or minimum_wage_lookup. It lacks an active verb, being a noun phrase, and 'DEMO' adds ambiguity, but the topic is clear.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus the sibling tools, or what type of user query it best serves. The 'DEMO' label hints at non-production status but does not explain when it should or should not be invoked.

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