zurich_parliament_members

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

Annotations already declare it read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it shows current mandates and functions and returns a Markdown list, providing additional useful behavior context.

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?

Extremely concise: three sentences plus a return note, front-loaded with the main purpose, no unnecessary information.

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?

With annotations, schema, and output schema present, the description covers the tool's purpose and return format. Lacks mention of optional parameters (format, active_only, max_results) but schema compensates.

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 mentions three of the six parameters (name, party, commission) but does not explain format, active_only, max_results. However, the input schema provides detailed parameter descriptions, so the overall parameter understanding is adequate.

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 members of the city council of Zurich, and specifies searchable fields (name, party, commission). It distinguishes itself from sibling 'zurich_parliament_search' which likely focuses on documents.

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?

Usage is implied by stating the search capabilities, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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