es_search_tax_rulings

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the search criteria; it does not mention pagination, result limits, or any caveats. This is acceptable given the annotations but not particularly rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action, resource, and search criteria. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with 5 optional parameters, a full output schema, and rich annotations, the description is minimally sufficient. It names the resource and criteria, while the schema and annotations handle the rest. Slightly more context (e.g., that this is for Spanish tax agency rulings) could improve it, but it is not incomplete.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, each with meaningful detail (e.g., 'free-text query over the ruling corpus', 'earliest fecha salida, dd/mm/aaaa'). The tool description adds no semantic value beyond the schema, so a baseline 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?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Search'), a specific resource ('DGT tax rulings (consultas tributarias)'), and search criteria ('by free text and/or date'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like es_search_teac_doctrine or es_get_tax_ruling.

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 gives clear context on what is searched (DGT tax rulings) and the two search dimensions (free text and date). It implicitly indicates that this tool is for searching rather than retrieving a specific ruling, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions.

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