bakom_rtv_suche

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds that the tool searches and returns contact/license info, which aligns with annotations. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits) are disclosed.

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 reasonably structured with Args, Returns, and Schema sections, but the first two lines are redundant (both say 'search licensed broadcasters'). Some conciseness could be improved without losing clarity.

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 complex input (object with 5 sub-properties) and the presence of an output schema in the description, the description is fairly complete. It explains the main filters, the return structure, and the data fields. Minor gaps exist: limit and response_format are only in the schema.

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 description's 'Args' section merely repeats parameter names without adding meaning. The input schema already provides descriptions for each parameter (query, media_type, kanton, limit, response_format), making the description redundant. Baseline 3 due to high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool searches for licensed radio and TV broadcasters in Switzerland using the BAKOM RTV database. It uses specific verbs like 'suchen' and 'durchsuchen' and distinguishes from sibling tools focused on frequencies, broadband, transmitters, etc.

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 implies usage for searching Swiss broadcasters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings. While context suggests its niche, no direct alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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