search_guidelines

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool searches local data, operates at clause level, supports AND queries, and references an external resource for the list of loaded items. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but these are generally expected for a search tool.

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 concise with multiple sentences, each serving a purpose: scope, keyword behavior, year usage, reference resource, and sibling tool prioritization. No unnecessary information, and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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 search tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what constitutes the data source, how keywords work, year separation, and a fallback to a sibling tool. It could mention the default behavior for optional parameters, but overall it is 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for `query` (AND condition with spaces) and `year` (separate guidelines by year), but does not explain `issuer` or `limit`. The partial coverage earns a moderate score.

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 explicitly states the tool searches locally loaded guidelines at the clause level, with a specific verb 'search' and clear resource scope. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `search_admin_rules` by noting that standing guidelines should use that tool instead.

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 clearly states when to use this tool (for guidelines not on law.go.kr) and when not to (for standing guidelines, which should use `search_admin_rules`). It also explains query behavior (AND for multiple keywords) and year filtering.

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