singapore_search_statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: results are resource IDs rather than data, and queries must be in English. It does not mention pagination behavior or result ordering, but with annotations this is a minor gap.

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 tight sentences: the first establishes scope, the second establishes the follow-on workflow and the language constraint. Nothing redundant and the most important information leads.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and the annotations cover safety. What remains missing for a 3-parameter search tool is any guidance on pagination or result-set size, which an agent calling with limit/offset would benefit from.

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 carry parameter meaning, yet only the query parameter gets a hint ('Use English terms'). The limit and offset parameters, including their defaults and the 100 cap, are undocumented in both the schema and the description.

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+resource ('Search SingStat Table Builder') and enumerates the covered domains, which distinguishes it from the many singapore_query_* point-dataset tools and from singapore_search_catalog. It also names the intended downstream consumers (inspect_statistics/get_statistics), so an agent knows exactly which namespace this search serves.

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 description routes the agent through a clear workflow: search here, then use the returned resource IDs with inspect_statistics/get_statistics. It adds a usage constraint ('Use English terms') but gives no explicit exclusions against siblings like singapore_search_catalog or singapore_lookup_dataset.

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