hdx_datasets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and only implies read-only access. It says nothing about pagination, result limits, rate limits, or whether the search hits a live API. The presence of an output schema offsets the need to describe return values, but behavioral disclosure is still thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming the action, resource, and domain, with no filler. It is efficient but leaves no room for the guidance that is missing elsewhere.

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 search with an output schema, the description covers the minimum: what it searches and where. It falls short of the usage context and parameter meaning an agent needs to invoke it confidently against overlapping siblings.

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 0%, and the description never mentions the single parameter q. The odd default of "ukraine" is left unexplained, so an agent gets no guidance on query syntax, expected terms, or how the default affects results.

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 (search) and resource (humanitarian datasets) plus the source domain, which loosely differentiates it from nearby siblings like relief_disasters and disaster_alerts. It does not explicitly say how it differs from those, but the resource is concrete.

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?

There is no indication of when to prefer this over relief_disasters, disaster_alerts, data_sources, or source_catalog, all of which overlap in supplying humanitarian or catalog-style information. No exclusions or preconditions are given.

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