dms_legal_kpi

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It accurately describes the output type ('compliance KPI/KRI definitions and Lookups') but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as auth needs, rate limits, or side effects. The text is consistent with a read-only lookup operation.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, delivering complete information clearly.

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-parameter complexity and absence of return schema, the description covers the tool's purpose. However, it could be more complete by mentioning the absence of filtering or that it returns all data, but it meets the minimum viable for a simple lookup tool.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the description does not need to compensate. It successfully adds value by describing the return content, which is sufficient given no parameters exist.

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 returns 'compliance KPI/KRI definitions and Lookups (master data) from the Legal Compliance Workbook,' using specific nouns. It differentiates from siblings like 'dms_legal_risk' or 'dms_stats' by the 'KPI/KRI definitions and Lookups' focus, though 'Return' could be more specific.

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?

No explicit usage context or alternatives are mentioned. The description implies it is for master data lookups but does not guide when to choose this over siblings like 'dms_legal_register' or 'dms_risk_lookup'. It meets the minimum viable standard without additional guidance.

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