get_dataset

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does reveal the dual fetch/list behavior and the categories of data returned, but says nothing about permissions needed, behavior for an invalid id, or pagination of the list mode.

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?

Two very short fragments with zero filler, and the primary behavior precedes the conditional. The telegraphic style omits a verb and reads as a field list rather than a sentence, which slightly hurts scannability without wasting any words.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be detailed, and both modes are mentioned. Still, for a tool with no annotations, the definition leaves gaps around error behavior for a bad id and what the list mode returns.

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 0% and the schema only exposes a nullable dataset_id with a null default. The description partially compensates by explaining that omitting the id switches to list mode, which is genuine meaning beyond the schema, but it never describes the expected id format.

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 names the resource and its contents ('A registered dataset's sessions, subjects, attributes and input artifact ids') and reveals a dual mode ('With no id, lists datasets'), which separates it from register_dataset. However, it is a noun phrase with no verb, so 'get' is inferred rather than stated, and it never distinguishes itself from inspect_artifact or list_artifacts.

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 only guidance is the conditional 'With no id, lists datasets', which explains what happens when the parameter is omitted but not when to choose this tool over siblings like register_dataset or list_artifacts. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing are given.

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