Hent ferske datapakker fra Lovdata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool re-downloads all datasets, rebuilds the index from scratch, and takes about two minutes, which is meaningful behavioral context. It stops short of detailing side effects such as temporary unavailability or concurrent-run implications, so it is adequate but not rich.

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 three short, information-dense sentences with the core action front-loaded and the time/scheduling context following. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundancy.

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?

For a no-parameter maintenance action, the description covers the key decision factors: what it does, how long it takes, and when it normally runs. It could mention output or operational impact, but the essential information needed to decide whether to invoke the tool is present.

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 zero parameters and the schema is empty, so the baseline of 4 applies. There are no parameter-level details for the description to add, and the description does not attempt to invent any.

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 names a concrete action: it downloads Lovdata datasets again, rebuilds the law index from scratch, and refreshes preparatory works from the Storting. This clearly identifies the resource and scope, and distinguishes sync from sibling read/search tools such as search, get_document, and status.

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 notes that a systemd timer runs the sync weekly and that manual runs are rarely needed, giving an agent clear guidance on when not to use it. It does not go as far as naming explicit alternative tools or conditions, but the scheduling context is strong and actionable.

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