nhgis_get_data_table

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 states what the tool does but does not reveal any behavioral traits such as being read-only, requiring authentication, or any side effects. The added detail about 'all variable descriptions' provides some output context, but overall it lacks transparency about behavior.

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, focused sentence with no redundancy. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output without wasting words.

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?

The tool is simple (2 params, no output schema), and the description adequately covers its main outcome: returning information about a data table including variables. It does not mention error cases or return format, but given the low complexity and full schema coverage, the description is sufficiently complete.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema—it only rephrases the identifiers. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 purpose: 'Get detailed information about a specific NHGIS data table within a dataset, including all variable descriptions.' It uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('data table'), and specifies the context ('within a dataset'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like listing or searching 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 implies the use case: when you need detailed variable descriptions for a specific table. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the clear scope provides adequate context for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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