dutch-gov-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It doesn't mention rate limits, authentication requirements, response format, pagination behavior beyond the offset parameter, or whether this is a read-only operation. The description merely states what the tool does without revealing how it behaves.

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, efficient sentence that states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information about what the tool does.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (which handles return values) and 100% schema coverage for inputs, the description is minimally complete. However, for a search tool with multiple similar siblings and no annotations, it should provide more context about when to use it and what distinguishes it from alternatives.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already documents all four parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema. This meets the baseline expectation when schema coverage is high, but doesn't provide extra value.

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 tool searches Dutch government datasets on a specific platform (data.overheid.nl), providing a specific verb ('search') and resource ('Dutch government datasets'). However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'search_cbs_datasets' or 'get_dataset', which appear to serve similar purposes in the same domain.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools like 'search_cbs_datasets', 'get_dataset', and 'query_cbs_data' that likely overlap in functionality, there's no indication of when this general search tool is preferred over more specific ones.

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