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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the paginated nature and that it returns slugs/names, but it does not elaborate on pagination behavior or other edge cases. This is comparable to the get_calls calibration, resulting in a 3.

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 two concise sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded. It avoids fluff and every sentence contributes to the tool's understanding.

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 an output schema, so return values need no explanation. The description covers purpose, usage, and basic behavior. The only minor gap is parameter semantics, but that is already scored separately; overall the description is sufficient for a simple list tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description only says 'paginated list' without explaining that 'limit' controls page size and 'offset' controls the starting position. The two parameters (limit, offset) remain semantically under-specified, and the description does not compensate for this gap.

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 the tool returns a 'paginated list of all dataset slugs/names' from the 'New Zealand open data catalogue (data.govt.nz CKAN)', which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling package_show by framing it as a precursor step: 'before fetching details with package_show.'

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 explicitly says to use this tool 'to enumerate available datasets before fetching details with package_show', providing clear context and naming a related alternative. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it (e.g., for searching, package_search), but it offers enough guidance for the primary use case.

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