Get FCSC dataset structure

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates that the tool 'Returns' data, implying a read-only operation, and mentions practical uses (building keys, explaining breakdowns). However, it does not explicitly state side-effect-free behavior or provide details on error handling or required permissions, leaving some ambiguity.

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 two sentences, both informative and free of fluff. It front-loads the primary action ('Returns the dimensions and codelists') and then provides usage guidance, achieving maximum efficiency with zero wasteful content.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately conveys its purpose and usage. It explains what the tool returns (dimensions and codelists) and why you would use it. A brief mention of the response structure could enhance completeness, but it's not essential for such a straightforward tool.

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 already provides a full description of the single parameter `datasetId`, including an example, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds marginal context by linking the parameter to building a `key` for `getDatasetData` and referencing `listDatasets`, but it does not significantly expand on the parameter's meaning beyond the schema.

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 the dimensions and codelists for one FCSC dataset', identifying both the action and the resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying it works on a single dataset's structure rather than listing datasets or retrieving data.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: 'Use this when you need to build a filtered `key` for getDatasetData, or to explain what breakdowns a dataset offers.' It clearly indicates the intended use case, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools directly.

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