Licence and attribution for TED data

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the burden; it does disclose that rate limits and usage restrictions are part of the response, which is meaningful behavioral context about the upstream TED API. However, it does not state that the call is read-only/side-effect free, whether the values are static or cached, or the response shape.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that enumerates the four things returned. No filler, no restatement of the tool name.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned content (licence, attribution string, rate limits, restrictions), which is the key information for this trivial lookup. It stops short of describing format or whether attribution must be displayed verbatim, which would have made it fully 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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; baseline is 4. Nothing in the description contradicts the empty schema.

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 names the specific resource (licence, attribution string, rate limits and restrictions) scoped to TED data, and the title reinforces it. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like fingrid_licence_info or ecb_licence_info purely by the dataset qualifier, though no verb (e.g., 'returns') is used.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers it should call this when it needs attribution text or rate-limit constraints before using TED endpoints such as ted_search_tenders. There is no explicit 'use when' clause or statement of what to do with the returned licence terms, but for a zero-parameter informational tool the intent is reasonably recoverable.

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