search_regulations

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

Describes behavior beyond name: returns name and pcode, sorted by active first, paginated 50 per page. Also explains the exclude_abolished parameter effect. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does so adequately.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose and structured with an Args section. It is clear but slightly redundant (Args section repeats info from prose). No waste, but could be more integrated.

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 no output schema, the description mentions 'list of regulations' but lacks details on return fields beyond name and pcode. Status is mentioned only for abolished cases. Could be more complete about the response format.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning: explains keyword with examples, offset default 0, exclude_abolished default false and its effect. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'search regulation names by keyword' and specifies it searches a complete list of 11,700+ regulations. It distinguishes from siblings like search_interpretations and search_judgments, which are for different legal resources.

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?

Provides context for when to use (keyword search for regulations), mentions ordering by active regulations first, and lists default pagination. Does not explicitly exclude use cases or mention alternatives, but the context is clear.

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