get_compliance_deadlines

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns data (dates and fines) but does not mention any behavioral traits like read-only nature, permissions, or side effects. For a simple data retrieval, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Description is two concise sentences: the first states the function, the second states when to use. It is front-loaded, contains no fluff, and 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 zero parameters, no output schema, and a simple retrieval purpose, the description covers everything needed: what it returns (dates and fines) and when to use it. No gaps.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the description adds no parameter-level detail, and no further explanation is needed.

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?

Description clearly specifies what the tool does: 'Return the canonical EU AI Act application dates (post Digital-Omnibus) and the fine tiers.' It uses a specific verb ('return') and resource ('dates and fine tiers'), and distinguishes from siblings (classify, lookup, search) by focusing on compliance deadlines and penalties.

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?

Description explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use when asked when the EU AI Act applies, when a deadline is, or how big the fines are.' This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly exclude scenarios or name alternatives, but the sibling tools imply different use cases.

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