Search Legislation

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. Describes methods and jurisdictions but does not disclose safety info, rate limits, or default behavior (e.g., default method is auto but not stated). Missing read-only hint.

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?

Short and front-loaded with purpose. However, the dense list of methods and jurisdictions could be better structured for readability.

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 7 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description only covers jurisdiction, method, and offset partially. Missing details on limit, format, sortBy, return values, error handling, and rate limits.

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 0%. Description adds meaning by listing jurisdiction values and method names, but does not explain each method's behavior (e.g., what 'near' means) and omits boolean from the method list present in schema. Other params like limit, format, sortBy are not described.

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?

Clearly states 'Search Australian and New Zealand legislation.' Lists jurisdictions and methods, and distinguishes from sibling tools like search_cases and search_citing_cases.

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 mentions using offset for pagination and lists jurisdictions and methods. However, does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use.

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