crehq_dataset_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently lists the metadata fields returned (row count, column schema, coverage, etc.), but it does not disclose potential error behavior (e.g., invalid slug), or explicitly state that no data values are returned. The read-only nature is implied by 'Get' but not stated.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the core action first, then specifies the metadata contents in a dash-separated list. Every word earns its place; 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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description is complete: it explains what the tool returns (detailed metadata fields) and its purpose (evaluation before download). No significant gaps remain.

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 100% coverage for the single parameter 'slug', including the guidance that it comes from crehq_datasets_list. The description only repeats 'by slug' and adds no extra semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full metadata for one dataset by slug'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like crehq_datasets_list (listing) and crehq_dataset_download (downloading). It also enumerates the metadata contents, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 phrase 'everything needed to evaluate it before download' provides clear context that this tool is for pre-download evaluation, differentiating it from download/list tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, falling short of the highest bar.

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