idescat.search_tables

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool is for discovery-only, implying read operation, and details behavior like semantic alias support and geo_candidate preference. Does not mention rate limits or auth, but adequately explains core 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?

Five sentences packed with information, front-loaded with purpose. Efficiently includes usage instructions and links to sibling tools. Could be slightly more concise but overall well-structured.

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 (not shown), the description covers purpose, usage flow, and provenance. It references related tools and provides enough context for a search/discovery tool. Minor gaps in parameter details but complete for typical use.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'query' parameter with examples and semantic aliases, but does not describe 'lang' or 'limit' parameters beyond their schema. Partial compensation for missing schema documentation.

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 is for 'Topic discovery for IDESCAT Tables v2' with specific verb 'search' and resource 'IDESCAT tables'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like idescat_list_tables and idescat_get_table_data by emphasizing discovery and provenance.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on preferring geo_candidates and confirming with idescat_list_table_geos, and notes that search is discovery-only, recommending citation of metadata tools. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios but gives clear context.

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