faostat_list_bulk_downloads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It usefully warns that archives 'can be very large,' which is real operational context, but says nothing about auth requirements, whether access is read-only, or any rate/size limits on the listing call itself.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action; the second sentence adds genuinely useful size context rather than filler.

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 values need not be explained, and the size warning is helpful. However, with zero schema coverage on parameters and no annotations, the definition leaves the lang parameter and access behavior undocumented.

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. It implicitly ties the listing to a domain_code, but the lang parameter is never mentioned and no format/expected values are given for domain_code.

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 (List) and resource (bulk download files, ZIP/CSV archives) scoped to a domain. The purpose is unambiguous, though it does not explicitly differentiate from data-fetching siblings like faostat_get_data.

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 clause 'contain the full domain dataset' implies why one might want this, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g., faostat_get_data or faostat_get_datasize). The agent must infer the selection criterion.

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