faostat_list_documents

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 doesn't say whether the result is paginated, what the 'related' relationship is, or whether documents are filtered by language. For a list endpoint with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 efficient sentence with no waste, front-loading the verb and resource. However, it is arguably too terse for a tool whose parameters are undocumented.

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 no annotations, 0% parameter coverage, and an output schema that doesn't substitute for input clarity, the description should describe the domain_code/language semantics and any filtering behavior. It leaves the agent under-informed about both inputs.

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 both parameters are undocumented. The description mentions 'domain' but doesn't name the domain_code parameter or explain its format, and it ignores the lang parameter entirely, leaving the agent to guess.

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 (related documents) and clarifies what those documents are with examples (methodology papers, questionnaires). It doesn't differentiate from siblings like faostat_get_definitions or faostat_get_metadata, which also return descriptive content.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions. The agent must infer this is for fetching documentation linked to a domain, without knowing how it differs from metadata/definition tools.

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