get_stats_data_bulk

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral information. It mentions bulk retrieval but doesn't disclose rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling for invalid IDs, whether the operation is read-only or has side effects, or what happens when both 'stats_data_ids' and 'dataset_ids' are provided. For a bulk operation with 4 parameters, this is insufficient transparency.

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, efficient Japanese sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a bulk retrieval operation and front-loads the core functionality. Every word earns its place.

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 values), 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is minimally complete. It identifies the resource and bulk nature but lacks crucial context about parameter usage, behavioral constraints, and differentiation from siblings. For a bulk data retrieval tool in a statistical system, this leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but fails to do so. It mentions '複数の統計表ID/データセットID' (multiple statistical table IDs/dataset IDs) which maps to 'stats_data_ids' and 'dataset_ids' parameters, but doesn't explain the relationship between these two ID types, what 'start_position' and 'limit' control (likely pagination), or format requirements for IDs. With 4 undocumented parameters, this is a significant gap.

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 ('一括取得する' - bulk retrieve) and resource ('統計データ' - statistical data) with the scope of multiple IDs. It distinguishes from single-ID retrieval tools like 'get_stats_data' by specifying bulk operation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all sibling tools like 'get_stats_data_csv' which might also retrieve bulk data in CSV format.

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 alternatives. It doesn't mention when to use bulk retrieval versus single retrieval ('get_stats_data'), when to use this versus CSV export tools ('get_stats_data_csv'), or any prerequisites or constraints for bulk operations. The agent must infer usage from the name and description alone.

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