List Legislation Databases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the behavioral detail that it lists 'all' databases, indicating a comprehensive response. It also specifies the collection scope ('CanLII'), giving the agent context about the data source, but does not detail output format or pagination behavior.

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, specific sentence with no filler, front-loads the action verb, and earns its place by clarifying the resource scope.

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 the low complexity, presence of readOnly annotation, and complete schema coverage, the description sufficiently defines the tool's behavior for an agent. It lacks an output schema but listing tools typically return a simple list, and the description sufficiently scopes the return value.

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 schema provides full coverage for the single 'language' parameter, including enum values, default, and description. The tool description itself does not address the parameter, which is acceptable since the schema carries all necessary semantic information.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'legislation and regulation databases in the CanLII collection,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_legislation' and 'list_case_databases.' It unmistakably conveys the tool's function.

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?

While it lacks explicit references to alternatives or exclusions, the description clearly implies usage when one needs to enumerate legislation/regulation databases, making the context of use transparent. No specific 'when not to use' is stated, but the tool's name and description draw a clear boundary.

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