get_meta_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While it states this is a retrieval operation ('gets'), it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, what happens with invalid IDs, or the structure of the returned metadata beyond mentioning 'classification items, time axes, etc.'

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 appropriately concise with a clear main statement followed by Args and Returns sections. The bilingual format (Japanese main text with English section headers) is slightly unconventional but doesn't significantly impact clarity. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 has an output schema (which handles return value documentation) and only one parameter, the description is minimally adequate. However, for a metadata retrieval tool in a rich statistical data context with many sibling tools, it should provide more guidance about when this specific metadata format is needed versus CSV alternatives.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and only 1 parameter, the description provides the essential semantic meaning: 'stats_data_id' is a 'statistical table ID'. This adequately compensates for the lack of schema documentation for this single required parameter.

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 states the tool 'gets metadata for statistical tables' which is a clear verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'get_meta_info_csv' or explain what makes this metadata retrieval different from other data retrieval tools in the set.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_meta_info_csv' and 'get_stats_data' available, the description offers no context about when this specific metadata retrieval is appropriate versus getting the actual data or CSV-formatted metadata.

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