br_get_norma

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

Annotations mark tool as read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds specific data returned (publication provenance, amendment history, STF notes) and what is omitted (full text), providing context beyond 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 concise with one main sentence listing contents and exclusions. Uses a dash and parenthetical note, which is slightly dense but no wasted words.

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 tool's purpose and annotations, description fully explains what is returned and what is not, including reference to external documentation (DISCOVERY.md). Output schema exists, so return value explanation is not needed.

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 100% coverage with description for 'urn'. Tool description adds useful context: format is URN Lex, example given, and instruction not to invent one, adding value beyond schema.

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 'Resolve a Brazilian Norma Juridica... by its URN Lex' with specific items returned and explicit exclusion of full text, distinguishing it from siblings like br_get_norma_texto.

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?

Describes what the tool returns (metadata, provenance, history) and what it does not (full article text). Mentions no confirmed URL rule to Planalto and references DISCOVERY.md, but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives.

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