get_metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals that this returns the catalog-wide schema, not dataset-specific metadata, and describes the return format as an XML string. This is strong transparency, though it could have hinted at read-only behavior or potential response size, but 'Fetch' already implies reading.

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 concise and front-loaded, beginning with the core action. The note about usage and the Returns line are each purposeful and add value without redundancy. It wastes no words and is easy to scan.

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 simple, zero-parameter tool, the description is fully complete. It states what the tool does, what it returns (XML string), and how it differs from a sibling. The output schema (dict[str,str]) is vague, but the description clarifies the actual content, so all necessary context is present.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. According to the guidance, 0 parameters merits a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter-specific detail because none is needed; it focuses on the general behavior and return type.

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's function with an explicit verb and resource: 'Fetch the OData metadata document (EDM schema).' It immediately distinguishes itself from a sibling tool by stating it returns the catalog-wide schema and directing users to get_dataset_info() for dataset-specific 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?

The description explicitly says when not to use this tool: 'Use get_dataset_info() for metadata of a single dataset.' It also clarifies the scope (catalog-wide schema), ensuring users know exactly when this tool is appropriate.

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