duo_datasets_search

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as pagination behavior or output format effects. Given the annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate as the description adds minimal value beyond them.

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 with one sentence, examples, and a clear instruction. It is well-structured and front-loaded, but could be slightly more structured with bullet points.

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's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose but lacks details on how to effectively use the many parameters. It is adequate for a simple search tool but incomplete for advanced usage.

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' has a description). The description repeats the query guidance but provides no information on other parameters like rows, limit, offset, dryRun, verbose, or outputFormat, which are left unexplained.

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 searches DUO open datasets using education keywords, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that are specific to particular datasets (e.g., duo_exam_results, duo_schools).

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?

It provides clear guidance on using education topic keywords with examples and a caution against full questions. However, it does not mention when to prefer this tool over other DUO-specific tools like duo_exam_results or duo_schools.

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