ris_bezirke

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

No annotations are provided, and the description discloses a key behavioral constraint (only certain states publish). However, it does not address data freshness, rate limits, authentication, or output format beyond what is in parameters.

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 with a clear purpose, usage note, and example queries. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the tool's scope and constraints adequately. It could mention that output can be markdown or JSON (as in parameters), but overall it is complete for a search 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%, so the description need not repeat parameter details. The description adds context (state limitations, example queries) but does not directly explain parameters beyond 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 searches Austrian district administrative authority announcements and provides specific context about which states publish here. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., ris_bundesgesetzblatt, ris_landesrecht) by focusing on district level.

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 explicitly says 'Use this tool...' and notes that only certain states publish here, providing implicit guidance on when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternative tools for other legal sources.

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