Get Dataset Metadata

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns metadata and resource IDs, and that actual data is not included (since it directs to datasets_query). However, it does not mention return structure, error behavior, or any permissions, so it remains moderately transparent for a simple read-only metadata 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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by a clear usage instruction. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy, achieving excellent conciseness and structure.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential context: what the tool returns (metadata, resource IDs) and how to proceed (use datasets_query). It lacks a detailed list of returned fields, but this is not critical for a straightforward metadata fetch. The sibling tool context further clarifies its role.

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%, providing an example for dataset_id. The description adds context by explaining the purpose of the ID (to retrieve metadata for a specific NHS dataset and obtain resource IDs), but it does not add technical details beyond the schema. 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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Get detailed metadata for a specific NHS dataset'. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning that it returns resources (data files) and their IDs, which is not a function of datasets_list (listing) or datasets_query (querying data).

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 instructs when to use the returned resource ID with the datasets_query tool, giving clear cross-tool guidance. It implies this tool is for retrieving metadata before querying data, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with datasets_list.

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