Landesgesetzblatt durchsuchen

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the agent knows the tool is read-only and results may change. The description adds coverage scope and example queries but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination details, result format (beyond response_format parameter), or behavior with no results.

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 statement followed by example queries. It is well-structured with separate sections, though the examples could be formatted as bullet points for even easier reading.

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?

The description covers scope (all 9 states) and provides example usage. However, lacking an output schema, it does not describe the return fields or result structure, which would help agents understand what data to expect. Additionally, it could better differentiate from similar search tools among siblings.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 9 parameters. The description adds value with example queries demonstrating parameter combinations, but does not provide new parameter semantics beyond what the schema offers.

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 State Law Gazettes (Landesgesetzblatt) for official state/provincial laws, covering all 9 federal states. It distinguishes from siblings like ris_bundesgesetzblatt by specifying state-level focus.

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 implies usage for searching state law gazettes and provides example queries, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like ris_landesrecht or ris_bundesgesetzblatt. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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