kio_by_pzp_article

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

The description discloses that the tool uses a phrase search combined with a post-filter due to lack of server-side support, which adds significant behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. This helps the agent understand potential limitations.

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 concise (three short sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. The warning about post-filtering is useful, though the formatting could be slightly more structured.

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 100% schema coverage, presence of an output schema, and the behavioral detail provided (post-filtering), the description fully equips an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 adds value by providing concrete examples for the 'article' parameter (e.g., '226' or '224 ust. 1 pkt 1'), and the schema already has full coverage. The limit parameter is adequately described in the 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves KIO rulings citing a specific PZP article. It distinguishes from sibling tools like kio_search by focusing on article-based filtering.

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 provides clear context about the tool's purpose and the post-filtering limitation, implying use when article-specific results are needed. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer alternatives like kio_search.

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