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

With no annotations, the description has to carry behavioral disclosure. It communicates that the tool returns provenance metadata and implies a read-only citation lookup, but it does not describe the response format or any operational caveats.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence covers the tool's content and its intended use. The title adds useful context without 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 parameterless metadata lookup, the description covers the essential content and the main use case. There is no output schema, so a touch more detail about the exact return shape would make it fully complete, but nothing necessary to invoke the tool is missing.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to document them. It still adds meaning by specifying what fields the provenance result covers, beyond the empty schema.

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 explicitly names the resource (Perdiemo dataset) and the content it provides (source, computation date, licence, citation). It lacks an explicit verb describing the retrieval, but the title and 'Read this to attribute a figure correctly' make the tool's function clear.

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 a concrete trigger: call this when a figure needs to be attributed to the Perdiemo dataset. It does not name sibling alternatives or exclusions, but for a zero-parameter provenance tool the guidance is sufficient.

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