Get Judgment Paragraph Index

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the agent knows it's safe and idempotent. The description adds that it returns eId: first_line pairs for every paragraph, which is useful. No contradiction, and the description complements the annotations well.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by return structure and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value.

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 that an output schema exists (context signals indicate yes), the description does not need to detail the return format extensively. It covers the purpose, return content, and next step. Minor gap: no mention of pagination or limits, but acceptable for a simple index 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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for the required 'slug' parameter. The tool description does not add further parameter details, but the baseline is met. The tool description focuses on the overall behavior rather than parameter specifics.

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 it gets the paragraph navigation index for a UK court judgment, returning eId: first_line pairs. It distinguishes from the sibling judgment_get_paragraph by indicating that this tool is for discovering identifiers and the sibling for reading content.

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?

Explicitly guides when to use: 'Use this to discover paragraph identifiers, then call judgment_get_paragraph to read specific ones.' This provides a clear workflow and directs to the appropriate sibling tool.

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