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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. Description adds that it returns codes and names, and that omitting query lists all indicators, providing context beyond annotations.

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?

Description is three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and no wasted words. It efficiently conveys search/list behavior, return type, and relationship to get_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?

With only one optional parameter and an output schema present, the description covers the tool's functionality fully: search/list, return of codes/names, and guidance to use get_data. No additional 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with description and examples for the single parameter. The tool description reinforces the schema by showing example calls and explaining the omit-for-all behavior, but does not add new parameter constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states the tool searches or lists WHO Global Health Observatory indicators and returns codes and names. It distinguishes itself from sibling get_data by explaining that the indicator code is used with get_data to retrieve actual values.

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?

Description provides clear context on usage: optional query for filtering, listing all if omitted, and directs to use get_data for values. However, it does not explicitly exclude other siblings or state when not to use this tool.

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