bakom_telekomstatistik_uebersicht

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that data comes from the opendata.swiss CKAN API and returns download links, providing useful context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main action, and includes necessary args and returns. However, it includes a full JSON schema for the return value, which may be redundant if an output schema is defined elsewhere, adding slight unnecessary length.

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 moderate complexity, annotations cover safety, and output schema is provided, the description adequately explains the tool's data source, use cases, and return structure. It is complete for typical use, though guidance on sibling differentiation is missing.

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 already includes descriptions for 'thema' and 'response_format', and the tool description repeats them without adding new meaning. Schema description coverage appears high despite context signal saying 0%, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves Swiss telecommunications statistics from BAKOM datasets, listing specific themes (breitband, mobilfunk, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like bakom_mobile_coverage or bakom_broadband_coverage, which focus on specific data types.

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 mentions usefulness for market analysis, political reports, and AI demonstrations, implying usage contexts. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when detailed coverage data is needed instead of overview statistics.

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