nomis_datasets

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only and idempotent. The description adds a useful default behavior ('filtered and limited summary by default') but leaves the includeRaw requirement for full definitions to the schema, so an agent could slightly over-read 'return a dataset definition'.

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 the primary verb and resource first. There is no filler, and both operating modes are conveyed efficiently.

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 minimally viable for a read-only listing/definition tool with an output schema and detailed input schema. However, it lacks guidance on when to select it over sibling NOMIS tools and does not mention output format options, leaving some selection burden on the agent.

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?

With only 50% schema description coverage, the description adds some meaning by distinguishing list mode from definition mode and noting the default summary behavior. It does not explain format, limit, or the tool const, so it only partially compensates for schema gaps.

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 states a specific resource ('NOMIS datasets') and two clear operations: listing datasets or returning a dataset definition. It is clear enough to be separated from NOMIS codelists/concepts/query tools, though it does not explicitly name alternative siblings.

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?

Usage is implied: use this tool to list datasets or fetch a definition. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus nomis_query, nomis_codelists, or nomis_concepts, and no exclusions are stated.

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