get_simdasi_table

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the core function and required inputs but does not disclose return format, pagination, or any side effects. The prerequisites are helpful but basic behavior is only partially transparent.

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 concise sentences with the main action front-loaded. No waste; every sentence earns its place by stating what the tool does and what inputs are needed.

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 data retrieval tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, required parameters, and their source. It is slightly vague about what 'detailed data' means and does not describe the response format, but it remains sufficient for invocation.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for all three parameters (coverage 100%), so the schema carries the heavy lifting. The description adds minimal extra context (e.g., the source of id_tabel from list_simdasi_tables), but it largely restates schema information.

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 action ('Get detailed data') and the target resource ('SIMDASI table') scoped by area and year. It distinguishes from sibling list tools by focusing on retrieving specific table data rather than listing available tables.

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 explicitly states the required parameters and notes that id_tabel must come from list_simdasi_tables, implying a prerequisite step. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, but gives clear contextual guidance.

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