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

The description adds value beyond the annotations by specifying the output includes 'all resources and their resource_ids', which clarifies the scope of the returned data. The annotations already indicate a safe, read-only, idempotent operation, so the description's additional detail about resource IDs is useful contextual behavior.

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, clearly structured sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Show full metadata') and directly states the key details. No redundant or extraneous words are present.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and clear annotations, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does, how to invoke it, and what the response includes. The reference to search_datasets provides enough workflow context for an agent to use it effectively.

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% with the 'id' property already explained as 'Dataset id or name (from search_datasets)'. The description repeats this same information without adding additional semantic detail, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding 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 clearly states the action ('Show full metadata') and the resource ('one Slovenia Open Data dataset') with an explicit lookup method ('by id or name'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_datasets and query_resource by specifying it returns complete metadata including resource_ids.

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 provides contextual usage by noting the id/name comes from search_datasets, implying a typical workflow of searching first then retrieving details. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a full 5.

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