eurostat_datasets_search

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description only states 'Search', which is consistent but adds no additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations convey. Since the bar is lower with annotations, but description contributes nothing new, score is 2.

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 perfectly concise. It conveys the core purpose without any extraneous words. Every word earns its place.

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, no output schema, and annotations cover readOnly and openWorld, the description is minimal. It lacks details on result format, how to refine searches, the role of the 'rows' parameter, or any limitations. While it provides the basic purpose, it is incomplete for effective use in all scenarios.

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?

Input schema has 2 parameters: 'query' (required, string with examples) and 'rows' (optional, integer, no description). Schema description coverage is 50%. The description does not mention parameters at all, thus fails to add meaning or compensate for the undocumented 'rows' parameter. Baseline 3 reduced due to lack of compensation.

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 resource 'Eurostat for EU statistics datasets', and the method 'by topic keywords'. It is specific and distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'data_europa_datasets_search' by explicitly naming Eurostat. High 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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for Eurostat data through the name, but no explicit context, exclusions, or alternatives are given. Sibling tools exist for other data sources, but the description does not help the agent differentiate.

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