faostat_get_metadata

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 usefully discloses the scope of returned content (data sources, collection methods, coverage, limitations), but says nothing about whether this is a read-only/cacheable call, how the 'lang' parameter changes behavior, or any rate or auth constraints.

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 no filler; the verb and scope come first and the enumeration of content types earns its place by telling the agent what it will receive.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required here, and the content enumeration covers the 'what'. However, with no annotations and no parameter documentation, the description leaves the lang parameter and the domain_code format entirely unexplained.

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% across two parameters. The phrase 'for a domain' loosely implies domain_code, but no code format or example is given, and the lang parameter (with its 'en' default) is never mentioned in the description, leaving half the parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 (get) and resource (methodology and metadata) scoped to a domain, and enumerates the content types returned. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from near-siblings such as faostat_get_definitions or faostat_get_definitions_by_type.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. An agent cannot tell from this text whether metadata should be fetched before or after faostat_get_definitions or faostat_get_codes, both of which sound adjacent.

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