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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the temporal coverage, the source, and the shape of what is returned, though it omits pagination or result-size 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?

Three short sentences, purpose front-loaded, then the routing instruction, then provenance. Nothing is wasted and each sentence has a distinct job.

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-param, zero-required listing tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description covers scope, source, return contents and the follow-up call. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and the single optional `query` param is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no filtering semantics beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ("List") and resource ("Canadian census datasets available through CensusMapper"), plus scope (1996–2021) and returned fields (dataset ids, descriptions, references). It names the CensusMapper-specific resource, distinguishing it from the broader census.* and statcan.* siblings.

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?

"Use the dataset id with censusmapper.data" explicitly routes the agent to the downstream alternative and implies this is the discovery step that precedes data fetching. It gives clear context but no explicit when-not/exclusion guidance beyond that flow.

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