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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value not in annotations: it discloses the return shape ('dataset cards, not values') and that the search returns ids rather than data, which matters because there is no output schema.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and routing guidance before filter notes and the return-value caveat. Every sentence carries information; nothing is padding.

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 read-only search with no output schema, the description covers what it returns, when to call it, and what the filters do. It does not explain result ordering, pagination behavior, or what happens when no datasets match, which are minor gaps given the annotations already establish the operation is safe and idempotent.

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 every parameter (query, country, source_name, limit) is already documented in the schema with examples. The description only restates that country and source filters are optional, adding no syntax, format, or matching-behavior detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find official economy datasets') and names the actual catalogues it covers. The line 'Returns dataset cards, not values' plus 'Use first to get dataset ids' cleanly separates it from value-oriented siblings like get_series and get_dataset.

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?

'Use first to get dataset ids' gives explicit ordering guidance that tells the agent this is the entry point before get_dataset/inspect_dataset. It stops short of naming a sibling as an alternative for a specific condition, so it is clear context rather than full when/when-not routing.

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