get_country_metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond the specific fields returned (source, data-type, estimation notes), offering minimal extra value. No mention of pagination, default behavior, or side effects.

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 extremely concise (one sentence). However, it sacrifices content for brevity, lacking parameter or usage context, which means sentences don't fully earn their place for a tool with multiple optional parameters.

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 three optional parameters and no required inputs, the description does not explain filtering logic or behavior when parameters are null. The 'top' parameter suggests pagination, which is unmentioned. Output schema exists but description should clarify input semantics.

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 does not explain the meaning of the three parameters (country, indicator_code, top). It merely implies 'country' via the tool name but provides no details on how parameters interact or affect 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns source, data-type, and estimation notes from the Metadata sheet, using a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('Metadata sheet'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_indicator_metadata.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., compare_countries, get_indicator_data). No mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and description alone.

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