datagouv_get_dataset

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Return', which implies a read operation, but does not explicitly state that it is read-only, nor does it disclose error behavior, authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. This is a minimal gap for a GET-like tool but still below the bar.

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 short and front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by a structured args line. No wording is wasted, though the 'Args' block partially overlaps with the input schema. Overall it is appropriately sized.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the core mechanics are covered: what it returns and what the parameter means. However, the absence of explicit usage guidance, behavioral safety disclosure, and error handling leaves the description only minimally viable for an agent to confidently use it in a broader workflow.

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%, but the description compensates with 'dataset_id: Dataset id or slug'. This adds crucial semantic meaning beyond the raw schema's 'type: string' by clarifying that both a dataset ID and a human-readable slug are accepted.

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 a clear verb ('Return') and resource ('dataset metadata and resources') and explicitly scopes the operation to one dataset. The distinction from the sibling datagouv_search_datasets is apparent: this retrieves one known dataset rather than discovering many.

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 when to use the tool by indicating it returns a single dataset and requires a dataset_id or slug. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it, mention prerequisites like knowing the ID, or recommend datagouv_search_datasets for finding datasets.

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