cl_get_norm

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, etc. The description adds 'Fetch full detail' which is consistent but does not provide additional behavioral information such as error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description adds minimal extra transparency.

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 a single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource, with 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?

With one parameter, clear annotations, and an output schema (as indicated by context), the description is adequate. It could be enhanced by noting the output schema covers the full detail, but it is not necessary. The description is complete for this simple 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 100%, so the schema already documents the parameter. The tool description mentions 'by its BCN resource URI' which mirrors the schema's description. No new semantic information is added beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it fetches full detail of one Chilean norm by its BCN resource URI. The verb is specific, and the distinction from sibling tool 'cl_search_norms' is implied by focusing on a single norm by URI rather than searching.

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: use this when you have a specific URI. However, no explicit guidance is given about when not to use it or when to prefer the sibling tool 'cl_search_norms'. The description lacks explicit when/when-not alternatives.

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