boe_legislacio

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

With no annotations, the description partially compensates by stating it returns fields like consolidation status. However, it does not disclose read-only behavior, authentication needs, or rate limits. The tool is a search operation, so the safety profile is implied.

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 with two sentences covering purpose, filters, and output. It is front-loaded but could benefit from a bulleted list for readability.

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 6 optional parameters and the existence of an output schema, the description adequately summarizes the tool's capabilities. It mentions the key returned fields, though it omits pagination details which are covered by the schema.

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%, so the description does not need to add parameter details. It restates filterable fields already in the schema, providing no extra meaning beyond what is in the 'description' properties.

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 consolidated Spanish legislation via BOE. It lists the filtering capabilities and the returned fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'boe_contractes' or 'boe_nomenaments'.

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 implies usage for searching legislation but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'boe_sumari' for daily summaries). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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