data_europa_datasets_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description's simple 'Search' is consistent. However, the description adds no behavioral detail (e.g., pagination, rate limits, result structure) beyond what annotations convey, so it does not enhance transparency.

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 sentence that is concise and directly states the purpose. It earns its place without unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more informative about parameters.

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 has 2 parameters and no output schema, the description provides adequate context about the domain (EU open data) but lacks details on result format, pagination, or how to use the 'rows' parameter. It is minimally viable but has clear gaps for a search tool with siblings.

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 50% (only 'query' has a description). The tool description mentions 'topic keywords' which aligns with 'query', but it does not explain the 'rows' parameter or its default limit. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, failing to compensate for the undocumented 'rows' parameter.

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 (Search), the specific resource (EU open data portal at data.europa.eu), and the method (by topic keywords). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like data_overheid_datasets_search by naming the EU portal explicitly.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like data_overheid_datasets_search or eurostat_datasets_search. Lacks explicit context for appropriate use cases or exclusions.

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