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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and no destructive behavior. The description adds value by specifying the exact metadata returned (columns, types, row count, etc.) and the data source (Michigan Open Data). No contradictions.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and key information. No extraneous words; every part adds value.

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?

Description adequately covers purpose, parameter, and return fields. With no output schema, it provides sufficient detail for a simple metadata retrieval tool. Could mention lack of pagination or error cases, but not required given simplicity.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for resource_id. The tool description echoes the parameter with an example, adding minimal context about the data source. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Michigan Open Data dataset's schema + metadata') and lists output fields (columns, types, row count, category, last-updated). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools, which are unrelated or serve different purposes.

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 implies usage context (need a resource_id, likely obtained from 'datasets' tool), but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use. Thus, clear context but no exclusions.

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