get_sdgs_data

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation ('Fetch') and mentions 'data values,' but it does not disclose the response format, whether results are time-series, possible limitations, or error behavior. The description adds little beyond what the tool name implies.

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?

Two focused sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second gives the critical prerequisite and workflow. No wasted words, and both sentences earn their place.

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 simple 2-parameter read tool with fully documented schema, the description is sufficiently complete for selection and invocation: it names the resource, specifies the prerequisite, and points to the schema for parameters. It lacks any description of the return structure, but given the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the tool, the gap is not severe.

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 100% and the schema already explains both var_id ('Variable ID from list_sdgs') and year ('Year filter... Omit for latest'). The description mostly repeats the var_id source ('Use list_sdgs first'), adding no new parameter semantics; thus the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('actual SDGs indicator data') for a specific variable. It clearly distinguishes this from list_sdgs, which is the discovery tool, and from other data-fetching siblings like get_sdds_data by scoping to SDGs.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance: 'Use list_sdgs first to find the var_id, then call this to get the data values.' This establishes the prerequisite and the proper sequence, effectively telling the agent when to use this tool versus its list counterpart.

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