crehq_dataset_download

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the licensing prerequisite ('Requires a tier/contract that includes the dataset') and the return behavior ('raw payload (or a signed link)'). This covers the primary behavioral traits, though it doesn't address error cases or rate limits – acceptable for a simple download tool.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every sentence adds value: what the tool does, the formats, the requirement, and the return type. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 only 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete: it identifies the required input (slug), the optional format with enum, the licensing prerequisite, and the return payload behavior. It sufficiently supports direct ingestion use.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% (both slug and format are described). The description mentions 'by slug' and lists format values, but this largely restates the schema. No significant new parameter semantics are added, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 'Download a licensed dataset by slug' – a specific verb and resource – and lists the supported formats (CSV, JSON, GeoJSON, XLSX). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like crehq_dataset_get (likely metadata retrieval) and crehq_datasets_list (listing datasets).

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: you need a licensed dataset and want to download it in a specific format, and it notes the prerequisite of a tier/contract. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools for non-download operations, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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