get_humanitarian_datasets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool searches data but does not clarify whether it is read-only, any authentication needs, rate limits, or pagination behavior. For a search tool, the lack of explicit read-only assurance is a gap.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the main action. However, it misses an opportunity to add one more sentence clarifying behavior (e.g., 'Returns a list of dataset names and metadata') without becoming verbose, preventing a score of 5.

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 a simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose but lacks completeness in terms of return format and differentiation from similar tools like search_datasets. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters ('query' and 'limit'), so the schema itself fully defines them. The description adds no additional parameter context, meeting the baseline for full schema coverage. No improvement or degradation from baseline.

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 verb 'Search', specifies the resource 'humanitarian datasets', scopes to 'Morocco', and indicates the source 'Humanitarian Data Exchange (HDX)'. This effectively distinguishes the tool from siblings like search_datasets (general) and get_morocco_economic_summary (economic focus).

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 usage when searching for humanitarian data related to Morocco from HDX. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_datasets for broader searches, get_climate_data for environmental data). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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