cbs_tables_search

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. Description adds no behavioral context (e.g., pagination, rate limits, output nature). Minimal added value.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Could include more detail without harming conciseness.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is too minimal. Missing information on pagination, output format options, dryRun/verbose semantics, and when to choose this over related CBS tools.

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 only 14% (only 'query' described). The description only mentions topic keywords; it does not explain top, limit, offset, dryRun, verbose, or outputFormat. Fails to compensate for low coverage.

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 clear verb+resource ('Search CBS statistical tables') and provides usage hint (use keywords). However, does not distinguish from sibling tools like cbs_iv3_search, cbs_observations, or cbs_table_info.

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?

Advises using concise Dutch/English keywords and not full questions, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives 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.