get_tdcc_opendata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, pagination, or error handling. Only 'Query' suggests non-mutating, but more details are needed.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by examples and a structured category list. Some redundancy in examples, but overall efficient and well-organized.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should cover return format, pagination, and authentication. It fails to do so, leaving the agent with insufficient context for a tool that queries 100+ endpoints.

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 100%, and the description adds value by mapping endpoint_id categories (e.g., 1-x: Share administration). This helps the agent understand endpoint patterns beyond the schema examples.

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 'Query' and the resource 'any TDCC OpenData endpoint by ID'. It provides numerous examples and a category breakdown, distinguishing it from the sibling tools which are specific endpoints.

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 implies usage for any TDCC endpoint not covered by specific sibling tools, but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives. The category listing aids in selecting appropriate endpoint IDs.

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