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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses key behaviors: SoQL syntax details, single-quote requirement, no URL encoding, default and maximum limits, pagination via $offset, and full-text search option. It also gives a clear prerequisite (call metadata first). This is a rich behavioral disclosure that goes beyond the minimum.

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 structured with bullets, examples, and a clear call-to-action. Every sentence provides useful information for using SoQL, and the organization makes it easy to scan. It is long but not verbose.

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 tool's complexity (a full query language) and lack of output schema/annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: query clauses, aggregates, examples, limits, pagination, and the prerequisite to fetch metadata. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 already has 100% coverage with descriptive text for all three parameters. The description adds significant value by detailing the SoQL key clauses ($select, $where, $order, $limit, $offset, $group, $q) and aggregate functions, which is essential for constructing the 'soql' parameter. It also clarifies the distinction between the limit parameter (max 1000) and the $limit clause (max 50000), though this nuance is not fully highlighted.

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 opens with 'Run a SoQL query against a Nova Scotia Open Data dataset,' which clearly identifies the action (run a query) and target (rows within a specific dataset). This contrasts with siblings like search_datasets (finds datasets) and get_dataset_metadata (returns metadata), making it well-differentiated.

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 gives concrete usage guidance: it explains the query syntax, provides examples, and explicitly instructs to 'Always call get_dataset_metadata first to find exact field names.' It does not, however, explicitly mention when to use search_datasets as an alternative, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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