data_dubai_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond that: no credentials are required for the search itself, only metadata is returned, downstream dataset APIs do require Dubai Pulse/DDSE credentials, and the catalog size is 600+ entries. Pagination/rate-limit behavior is still unmentioned, keeping it out of the top band.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the scope and credential caveat. The "portal that replaced Dubai Pulse" sentence is contextual padding but plausibly aids routing; nothing else is wasted.

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?

For a paginated, read-only search tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies everything an agent needs: what is searched, that results are metadata only, and that credentials gate the actual data APIs. Return-value details are correctly left to the output schema.

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 100% — query, page, and page_size are each fully documented in the schema, including defaults and the 1-100 range. The description adds no parameter-level detail (no query syntax, no paging guidance), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Search the data.dubai catalog for dataset metadata") plus scope (600+ dataset descriptions) and an explicit boundary ("METADATA ONLY"). An agent can distinguish this from sibling catalog tools such as data_dubai_themes, data_dubai_entities, and fcsc_search_dataset without opening any schema.

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 gives useful context that this portal replaced Dubai Pulse and that credentials are not needed here but are needed for the underlying dataset APIs, which implies when this tool is appropriate. However, it never names an alternative sibling (e.g. data_dubai_themes or data_dubai_entities) or states when NOT to use it, so routing between the catalog siblings is left to inference.

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