get_meta_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, and the description merely says 'get', adding no extra behavioral context such as response format, error scenarios, or any special handling. The description does not contradict the annotation but also does not enrich the agent's understanding of what happens beyond the read-only nature.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and object. There is zero fluff, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's primary 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's simplicity (one parameter, read-only annotation, and an existing output schema), the description is adequate for an agent to call it correctly. It does not detail what meta information includes, but the output schema likely covers that; the lack of sibling differentiation is a minor gap for such a straightforward getter.

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 schema covers 100% of the single parameter (stats_data_id) with a clear description ('統計表ID'), so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what is already in the 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 states a specific action ('取得する' = get) and resource ('統計表のメタ情報' = meta info of a statistical table), clearly indicating the tool's function. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_meta_info_csv or get_stats_fields, which could lead to ambiguity in selection.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. It does not mention alternatives or the context that would make this the preferred choice (e.g., when you need metadata rather than data or a CSV export).

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