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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns 'full metadata' for a single dataset, which hints at the scope of the response. It does not disclose error behavior or other edge cases, but this is acceptable given the simple lookup nature and presence of an 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word is necessary, with no filler or repetition of structured data.

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 one-parameter lookup tool with complete schema coverage and an output schema, the description is fully sufficient. It states the input type, the resource, and the outcome. The annotations and output schema cover safety and return structure, so no further context is needed.

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 parameter schema already documents 'id' with a description and example (921708). The tool description repeats the same example without adding new meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description provides no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 states the tool returns full metadata for a PANGAEA dataset given a numeric ID, using a specific resource and parameter. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like dataset_by_doi by specifying the numeric ID input.

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 phrase 'by its numeric ID' implies usage when a numeric ID is available, but it does not explicitly mention alternative tools (e.g., dataset_by_doi) or provide when-not-to-use guidance. Usage is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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