Search INSEE macrodata indicators by keyword to identify relevant data series for fact-checking. Provide a keyword to retrieve matching indicator names.
Search INSEE macrodata indicators by keyword.
Args: keyword: Search pattern for indicator names.
Returns: List of matching IndicatorResult.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| keyword | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool returns a list of matching IndicatorResult, which is useful, but it does not explain matching semantics, result limits, or any error behavior. For a simple search tool this is acceptable but minimal.
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 compact and well-structured, with a one-line summary followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.
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?
For a single-parameter search tool with an output schema available, the description covers the core need: what to pass and what to expect back. It lacks notes on matching details and alternative tool selection, but given the low complexity, the description is largely complete.
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 provides no description for the keyword parameter and schema coverage is 0%. The description compensates somewhat by defining keyword as a 'Search pattern for indicator names,' but it does not clarify whether matching is partial, exact, case-sensitive, or whether wildcards are supported.
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 INSEE macrodata indicators by keyword.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and differentiates it from nearby siblings like insee_search_geography and various get_data tools.
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 usage is implied: an agent should use this when it needs to find INSEE indicators by name keyword. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this over sibling search tools such as eurostat_search_datasets or worldbank_search_indicators, and no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.