Novita Normative

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the output elements (titolo, data, link, numero/data GU) and the filtering behavior, but does not mention potential limitations like feed lag or that this is a read-only operation. This is adequate but not rich.

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 no fluff, and effectively front-loads the core purpose. It packs useful details in a compact paragraph. Slightly redundant use of the term 'GAZZETTA UFFICIALE' in both the first sentence and the usage examples, but overall 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 simple read tool with 2 optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, default series, filtering option, and return content. The only minor gap is not elaborating on serie possible values, but that is not critical given the default.

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 explains 'argomento' as a keyword in the title and mentions 'Serie Generale per default', which partially clarifies 'serie'. However, it does not enumerate possible serie values beyond the default, leaving some ambiguity.

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 specific verb ('Restituisce') and resource ('atti pubblicati in GAZZETTA UFFICIALE'), and clarifies the default series. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools focused on searching legislation by content, jurisdiction, or parliamentary activities.

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?

Explicit usage scenarios are provided: 'novità normative', 'ultimi decreti/leggi', 'cosa è uscito in Gazzetta di recente'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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