bcn.search_packages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only offers a high-level purpose and examples, with no information on authentication, rate limits, pagination, result format, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an AI 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 extremely concise (one sentence). While brevity is valued, it sacrifices necessary detail. It could be restructured to include parameter hints or usage context without significant lengthening.

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 presence of an output schema (context indicates it exists), the description does not need to detail return values. However, the description is too sparse: it lacks parameter semantics, usage guidance, and behavioral context. The tool has several parameters and many siblings, so completeness is low.

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 0%, meaning the schema itself provides no parameter descriptions. The description adds no information about the three parameters (query, limit, offset). It does not explain that 'query' is a search string or that 'limit' and 'offset' paginate results. This is a critical gap.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: to discover or search for CKAN packages on Open Data BCN related to Barcelona city datasets. It provides examples of dataset types, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like bcn_get_package (which retrieves a specific package). However, it could be more explicit about the search action.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools for querying, previewing, and searching, the description should indicate that this is the primary search tool for discovering packages, while others are for specific operations. Missing context on when to use search vs other tools.

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