nomis_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering safety and repeatability. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond repeating the format enum from the schema. It does not disclose pagination, limits, error behavior, or what 'params' should contain.

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, terse sentence with no filler, which is efficient. However, its brevity is under-specification rather than conciseness – it omits essential details given the tool's complexity (4 params, nested object). It is structured to be quick to read but not informative enough.

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?

For a tool with a required dataset, a nested params object, and a format enum, the description is severely incomplete. It provides no instructions on building a valid query, what dataset identifiers look like, or how to structure the params object. Although an output schema exists, the input side is entirely unexplained.

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% – no parameter descriptions exist in the schema. The description does not compensate: it only names the formats (already in schema) and fails to explain the 'dataset' parameter, the nested 'params' object, or the fixed 'tool' value. An agent has no idea what values to supply for these fields.

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 verb 'Query' and the resource 'NOMIS datasets', explicitly mentioning the supported formats (JSON-stat or SDMX JSON). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nomis_codelists, nomis_concepts, and nomis_datasets, which deal with dataset discovery rather than data retrieval.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ons_data_query or nomis_datasets. The description only implies it queries NOMIS data, but does not explain selection criteria, prerequisites, or exclude cases. Sibling tools are not mentioned.

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