Polish Academic MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the output includes 'all downloadable resources' and API links, which adds useful context about return behavior. However, it lacks details on error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs, leaving gaps for a tool with no annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes essential details without waste. Every part earns its place by specifying the action, resource, and parameter context efficiently.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage context, and output details. However, without annotations or output schema, it could benefit from more behavioral transparency, such as error cases or response format specifics.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the dataset_id parameter. The description adds value by clarifying that the ID is 'the integer id field returned by dane_search', providing context beyond the schema's basic description. With only one parameter, this extra semantic detail is helpful.

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 'Get' and resource 'full details for a specific dataset on dane.gov.pl', specifying it includes downloadable resources like CSV, XLSX, JSON, and API links. It distinguishes from its sibling 'dane_search' by focusing on individual dataset retrieval rather than searching.

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 provides clear context by stating the dataset_id comes from 'dane_search results', indicating when to use this tool after a search. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives beyond the implied sibling relationship.

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