get_dimension_values

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states the basic function without mentioning error handling, response format, or any side effects. The presence of an output schema is not referenced.

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 short and to the point, with a clear verb-object structure. The list of examples is placed after the main sentence, which is reasonable. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate param description).

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?

The tool has an output schema, so the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks information about error cases (e.g., invalid dimension_code) and does not clarify whether the output is a list or another type. For a simple tool, it is minimally adequate.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description provides concrete examples for the sole parameter 'dimension_code' (e.g., 'COUNTRY', 'REGION'). This adds meaning beyond the schema's generic 'string' type, guiding the agent on valid inputs.

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 starts with 'Get the allowed values for a dimension,' which uses a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list_dimensions' (which lists all dimensions) by indicating it retrieves values for a given dimension.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not contrast with 'describe_indicator_dimensions' or explain which dimensions are valid. The examples give a hint but no explicit usage context.

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