Landesrecht durchsuchen

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description need not restate safety. It adds behavioral context by explaining the 'fassung_vom' parameter for consolidated versions, but does not disclose other traits like rate limits or authorization requirements.

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 two sentences and a bulleted list of examples. It front-loads the purpose and uses minimal, effective language.

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 tool has 11 parameters, no required ones, and no output schema, the description provides a good overview and practical examples. It covers core use cases but does not explain pagination or response format details, though these are in the schema.

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 parameters thoroughly. The description provides example queries that illustrate parameter combinations, adding marginal value 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 'Search Austrian state/provincial laws (Landesrecht)' with a specific verb and resource. It provides example queries that demonstrate the tool's scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like ris_bundesrecht or ris_landesgesetzblatt.

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 to find laws enacted by Austrian federal states' and gives concrete examples. While it does not mention when not to use it, the context of sibling tools and the domain-specific focus imply appropriate usage.

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