bakom_aktuell

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that it returns current information and lists topic areas, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits, data freshness, or error conditions. No contradiction with 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?

Description is structured with purpose, usage, Args, Returns, and Schema sections. It is fairly concise but the Schema block partially duplicates the input schema and could be omitted. Every sentence adds value.

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 the output schema exists, description adequately explains returns. It covers the single parameter (with subfields) and output fields. Missing details like pagination or error handling, but overall sufficient for a read-only tool.

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 description carries burden. It lists example thema values (e.g., 'ki', '5g') and mentions Ausgabeformat, adding some meaning beyond the schema's property descriptions. However, it does not fully document all possible values or constraints.

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 verb 'abrufen' and resource 'Aktuelle Themen, News und Regulierungen des BAKOM'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on current news/regulations rather than specific statistical data like coverage or frequency.

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?

Description explicitly says 'Nützlich für strategische Lageberichte und Regulierungsmonitoring', indicating when to use. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context of sibling tools implies differentiation.

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