Search Spain BOE / BORME daily bulletins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered; the description adds real context beyond them by disclosing the 31-day window constraint and the shape of the result set (titles, departments, PDF/HTML links) in the absence of an output schema. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose, constraints/returns, provenance. Nothing is padded, and the scope constraint is front-loaded. The source URL sentence is borderline but defensible as provenance for an official gazette.

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 no output schema, the description correctly carries the return-value burden by naming the fields returned. For a 6-parameter, zero-required search tool the coverage is good, though the undocumented bulletins/maxResults defaults and lack of pagination notes leave small gaps.

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 coverage is 67%, and the description reinforces the keyword/section/date-range dimensions plus the 31-day ceiling on the range. It adds nothing about bulletins (default BOE) or maxResults (cap 200), leaving those entirely to the schema, so it neither compensates for nor extends the coverage gap.

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 names a specific verb (Search) and a precisely scoped resource: the daily summaries of Spain's BOE and BORME gazettes. The domain is so specific that it cannot be confused with the funding/tender siblings, and it spells out the gazette acronyms an agent might encounter.

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?

It states the three filter dimensions (keyword, section, date range) and a hard 31-day cap, which implies how the tool is meant to be driven, but it never says when to prefer it over another source or what happens when the range exceeds the limit. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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