scl_list_datasets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description does not state whether this is a read-only operation, what the output format looks like, whether it can fail or throw errors, or any ordering/filtering behaviors. Since this lists datasets with FCDA members, it's implied to be read-only, but nothing is explicitly disclosed.

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, compact sentence that conveys the core purpose (listing datasets and FCDA members) and the optional filter (restrict to one IED). Every word earns its place with zero waste.

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 tool has an output schema which helps, but with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and an ambiguous 'path' parameter, the description leaves significant gaps. The agent cannot determine what the path parameter accepts, what the output structure is, or how this differs contextually from the many sibling list tools. For a moderately complex companion tool among many siblings, this is under-specified.

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 the description must compensate. It mentions 'Optionally restrict to one IED,' which maps to the 'ied' parameter, but the 'path' parameter is left entirely undocumented—the description doesn't clarify what path refers to (file path? SCL XML path?) or its format. With output schema present but 0% coverage and 2 undocumented-ish parameters, partial compensation only.

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 tool lists datasets and their FCDA members, with optional restriction to an IED. The verb ('list') and resource ('datasets') are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like scl_list_ieds, scl_list_goose, and scl_list_reports which target different resources. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with these siblings, so it loses the top score.

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?

The description implies usage (when you need to see datasets and their FCDA members) but gives no guidance on when NOT to use it or how it differs from sibling tools like scl_list_goose or scl_list_reports. The 'Optionally restrict to one IED' phrasing hints at the ied parameter usage but offers no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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