swiss_migration_statistics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states what data source it draws from but gives no behavioral detail: no mention of rate limits, data recency, whether it requires API keys (notable since a sibling 'swiss_set_api_key' exists), output format, or pagination. For a data retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant transparency 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?

The description is one concise sentence with no wasted words. However, this length reflects under-specification rather than deliberate economy; it's short because it lacks substance, not because it's efficiently complete.

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 1 parameter, no annotations, no output schema, and 33 siblings to disambiguate against, the description is far too thin. It provides no details about what data is actually returned, how queries work, whether an API key is needed, or how it relates to the similar search tools in the sibling list.

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?

There is one parameter (query) with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides zero explanation of what the 'query' should contain, what a good query looks like, or how it shapes the results. The default value 'migration asylum population' hints at usage but the description itself adds nothing about the parameter semantics.

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 it gets 'Swiss migration and population data' from SEM, naming the source. However, the verb 'Get' is generic and doesn't specify what form this takes (a search? a stat download?). The tool name suggests statistics but the description reads like a generic data retrieval tool without specific output characteristics, and it doesn't distinguish itself from the many other swiss_* data tools.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, which is a real concern given 33 sibling tools including swiss_statistics_search, swiss_opendata_search_datasets, and swiss_health_search_datasets. The description gives no context about when migration data should come from SEM specifically versus the general Swiss statistics/opendata tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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