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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description discloses batching behavior, automatic coordinate padding, pagination via _guidance over 50 results, error conditions, and the need to decode StatCan numeric codes via get_code_sets. It also states the underlying endpoint and requires citation of ProductId and Coordinate in the final response.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and usage, then adds return and error details in a structured way. It is somewhat long, with endpoint and exception details that may be less essential, but most sentences provide useful context.

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?

The tool has annotations covering safety, a fully described input schema, and a description that explains return shape, pagination, error modes, decoding requirements, and response citation expectations. There is no output schema, but the description adequately covers what the agent needs.

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 parameters are already well documented, including coordinate padding and limit/offset pagination. The description reinforces batch usage and padding but does not add substantial parameter semantics beyond the 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 gives a specific verb and resource: resolve {productId, coordinate} pairs to series metadata including vectorId, titles, frequency, and UOM. It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from the sibling get_series_info_from_vector, so an agent can identify the correct tool without opening schemas.

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 states exactly when to use the tool: to find vectorIds before calling get_sdmx_data or get_sdmx_vector_data. It also names an alternative and says not to call get_series_info_from_vector for the same series, which is explicit routing guidance.

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