search_datasets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses Portuguese-language content, accent-insensitive matching, empty-query behavior, and that limit is ignored when listing all datasets. It could still state explicitly that this is a read-only search with no side effects, but the behavior is otherwise well explained.

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 front-loaded with purpose and usage, then gives concrete example keywords and parameter semantics. Although longer than a minimal description, every section earns its place because the schema itself has no parameter descriptions.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required. The description still explains the search scope, language behavior, empty-query listing behavior, limit semantics, and the follow-up query_dataset call, making it complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 compensate, and it does: query is explained as Portuguese keywords with examples and an empty value listing all datasets; limit is explained with default 10, max 50, and ignored-when-listing-all behavior. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare 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?

States a specific verb and resource: search the SNS Transparency portal's ~150 datasets. It clearly distinguishes itself from curated siblings by saying to use it when curated tools do not cover the question, and it names query_dataset as the follow-up step.

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?

Explicitly defines when to use this tool versus the curated alternatives: when the curated tools do not cover the question, with concrete example domains such as hospital bed occupancy, births, INEM calls, and medicines spending. It also states the next action: call query_dataset with the returned dataset_id and field names.

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