list_taxlaw_site_menus

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the tool lists paths and call info, but does not mention any behavioral traits like side effects, rate limits, or return format. 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 two sentences long, starting with the main purpose and then providing guidance. No redundant information; every sentence earns its place. Very concise.

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?

The tool has one optional parameter and no output schema. The description informs what the tool outputs (paths and call info). For a simple list tool with filter, this is sufficient, though more detail on output structure could help.

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 input schema has one optional parameter 'query' with a description in Korean explaining it filters by menu name/section/key/action ID. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds marginal value beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool lists main menu access paths and action.do call info for the tax law information system. It uses specific terms but the purpose is clear. It mentions alternatives for cases without high-level tools, which helps distinguish from siblings.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (to list menu paths) and when not to, providing specific alternative tools: 'call_taxlaw_action' or 'get_taxlaw_page_text'. This is excellent guidance for an agent.

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