faostat_get_dimensions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the output is a structural listing of filterable dimensions, which is genuinely informative, but says nothing about read-only nature, permissions, or pagination/latency. For a simple read-only getter this partial disclosure is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the core action first and illustrative examples second. No filler; every clause adds meaning.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the description conceptually explains what the call yields. The main remaining gap is usage/parameter detail, but for a two-parameter read tool the description is largely complete.

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%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It only loosely implies a 'domain' argument (matching domain_code) and never mentions the optional lang parameter or its role in returned labels. The critical parameter naming/semantics gap is left unfilled.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the structure of a domain') and clarifies what 'dimensions' means with concrete examples (area/country, item/commodity, element/measure, year). This makes the purpose unambiguous, though it never distinguishes itself from siblings like faostat_get_codes or faostat_get_metadata.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the many sibling tools. The agent must infer that this is a discovery step from the phrase 'structure of a domain' alone.

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