Buscar legislación chilena

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the tool searches norms and mentions the source (BCN/LeyChile), but discloses no behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, result structure, or side effects. The description is too minimal for a tool with no 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 only two sentences, with the first stating purpose and source, and the second redirecting to full-text tools. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or filler.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 3 parameters, the description provides the basic purpose and one key usage hint. However, it lacks details on result formats (beyond 'formato' enum), pagination, error behavior, or how to differentiate from sibling search tools. It is minimally adequate.

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 coverage is 67%: 'limite' and 'formato' have descriptions, but 'consulta' lacks a schema description. The tool description does not add meaning for 'consulta' beyond implying it's a search query. Since the schema handles most parameters, a baseline of 3 is appropriate, but the missing coverage is not compensated.

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 searches Chilean legislation ('normativa chilena') using BCN/LeyChile. It distinguishes itself from full-text retrieval tools by redirecting to 'obtener_texto_norma'/'obtener_articulo', but does not differentiate from sibling search tools like 'buscar_derecho_chileno' or 'buscar_dictamenes', missing the top score.

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 a clear when-not scenario (for full text, use other tools), but offers no guidance on when to prefer this search tool over other similar search tools in the sibling list. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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