Get unicefdata API Reference (Python / R / Stata)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is known to be safe and idempotent. The description adds value by detailing the output content (function signatures, parameter descriptions, usage examples), which is beyond the annotations.

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 three concise sentences: first states purpose, second lists content, third gives usage guidance. No wasteful text, well-structured.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but confirmed), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers purpose, content, and usage completely for a tool with two optional parameters.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents both parameters with descriptions. The tool description does not add additional meaning for the parameters beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 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 specifies 'Get the unicefdata package API reference for Python, R, or Stata' with clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_data or search_indicators by focusing on code reference rather than data retrieval or search.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use this when you need to write code that uses the unicefdata package, or when the user wants to move from conversational exploration to reproducible scripts.' It implies when to use but does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives, which prevents a 5.

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