dataset_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully lists the returned attributes (vintage, units, privacy release, audit status), which is valuable given there is no output schema, but it never states that the operation is read-only/side-effect free, nor what 'privacy release' or 'audit status' actually mean or what form the response takes.

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 telegraphic clause with the most important instruction ('Call first') front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description must convey what the agent gets back, and it does so by enumerating the metadata categories. It falls short only in not defining the jargon terms or confirming read-only behavior, which is minor for a zero-parameter info call.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly spends no words on arguments and instead describes the return content.

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 names the resource implicitly (the dataset) and enumerates exactly what metadata it returns: coverage, vintage, units, privacy release and audit status. That is a clear purpose an agent can grasp without the schema. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling 'dataset_coverage', which overlaps on the coverage dimension.

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?

'Call first' is an explicit, actionable ordering directive that tells the agent when to invoke this relative to the other tools. There are no when-not conditions or named alternatives, but for an entry-point metadata tool the sequencing guidance is the main thing needed.

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