faostat_get_metadata

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses the scope of the operation (methodology and metadata) and lists included items. It implies a read-only operation, which is appropriate. It lacks details on response size or error handling, but the core behavior is clear.

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 paragraph plus a clean Args list. Every sentence adds value, and the main purpose is front-loaded. It is concise without being terse.

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?

The description is complete for a metadata retrieval tool: it explains the purpose, parameters, and what is returned. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return values. Coverage is adequate for the complexity.

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?

The description's Args section adds meaningful explanations: examples for domain_code and default for lang. This goes beyond the schema's bare titles, compensating for the 0% schema description coverage. Parameter semantics are well explained.

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 returns 'full methodology and metadata for a domain' and lists specific content types (data sources, collection methods, coverage, limitations). The verb 'get' plus resource 'metadata' is specific and distinct from siblings like faostat_get_definitions.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as faostat_get_definitions or faostat_get_dimensions. There is no mention of prerequisites or typical use cases, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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