search_hk_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses local search scope, ranked results, Chinese synonym expansion, and the returned fields. It does not describe auth needs, rate limits, or pagination behavior, but for a local read-style search the key behavioral traits are mostly covered.

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 front-loaded with scope and browse behavior, then adds language expansion and the load_hk_data handoff. It has minor redundancy in saying both 'English or Chinese' and 'Chinese and English both work', but otherwise every sentence is useful.

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, and the description still helpfully notes the returned dataset_id and bilingual title. The main gap is lack of limit/offset guidance for paging, but the schema supplies defaults, so the definition is largely complete for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate for all parameters. It explains keyword semantics well, including empty keyword browse mode and bilingual expansion, but it never mentions the limit or offset parameters, leaving two of three parameters to be inferred from bare schema defaults.

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 states a specific verb and resource: search ALL ~1150 CSDI datasets. It specifies scope (local), language handling, ranking, and browse behavior, and it distinguishes the next step from the sibling load_hk_data by saying to feed the dataset_id there.

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?

It gives clear usage context: no keyword means browse, and results should be passed to load_hk_data. However, it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like query_hk_data or summarise_hk_data, so the agent must infer those alternatives.

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