List OSHA Dataset Fields

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states that the tool returns metadata fields. It fails to disclose behavioral details such as default dataset, pagination (e.g., limit parameter), case-insensitivity of search, or any rate limits. The description does not contradict annotations but is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 a single, clear sentence of 13 words. It is highly concise and front-loaded with the essential purpose. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no unnecessary information.

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 that there is no output schema, the description should explain the structure of returned metadata fields, but it does not. It also omits default behavior for the 'dataset' parameter and how 'search' filtering works. For a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete for an agent to reliably invoke it.

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 has 100% description coverage for all three parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema, merely stating the return of metadata fields. It does not explain parameter interactions or provide additional context, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Return' and resource 'metadata fields' for the 'official DOL OSHA inspection or violation dataset'. It effectively identifies the tool's purpose and the datasets it operates on. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'osha_inspection_search' or 'dol_datasets_search', which slightly reduces clarity.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'osha_inspection_search' or 'osha_inspection_detail'. It implies but does not state that this tool is for exploring available fields, not for retrieving actual data. There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it.

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