Get Gov Guidance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the context that it is 'official GOV.UK' guidance, which is useful, but does not mention any rate limits, pagination, or return format. With annotations covering the core behavior, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by usage examples. Zero fluff, every word contributes. Highly efficient.

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 one simple parameter, no output schema, and safety annotations covering the behavioral aspects, the description is sufficient. It explains the source (GOV.UK) and when to use it. The only minor gap is not describing the return format, but for a search tool this is acceptable.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameter 'topic' is fully documented with examples. The description does not add any additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Search official GOV.UK tax and business guidance'), and provides specific example topics. It does not explicitly name a sibling tool for differentiation, but the purpose is unambiguous and distinct from the many accounting/finance tools.

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?

It gives explicit conditions for use ('Use when the user asks... what does HMRC say about X?', tax rules, filing requirements) and lists example topics. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' or named alternatives, but the context is clear enough to route the agent correctly.

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