search_within_kurum_yonetmelik

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 semantic mode requires an API key, keyword mode supports Boolean operators, and gives examples. However, it lacks details on error handling, rate limits, or limitations (e.g., what if mevzuat_no not found). The output schema exists but description doesn't mention return structure.

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 and well-structured, with bullet points for modes and examples. It front-loads the main purpose and avoids unnecessary words.

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 that an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. It covers mode selection, parameters, and examples adequately for a search tool. However, it could be slightly more complete by stating that it returns a list of matching articles, though not critical.

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% (baseline 3), but the description adds meaningful value by explaining modes, providing usage examples, and clarifying the semantic parameter's requirement. It goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 it searches within a specific Institutional Regulation's articles using keyword or semantic search. The verb 'search' and resource 'Institutional Regulation' (kurum yonetmelik) are specific and distinguish from siblings.

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 explains two modes with examples and requirements for semantic mode, but does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool versus other search_within_* siblings or search_kurum_yonetmelik. No exclusion or 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.