list_publishers

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns identifiers and the Swiss UID, which is useful but does not significantly extend the safety profile already conveyed by annotations.

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 two sentences plus a bullet list of parameters. No word is wasted; every sentence adds unique value: purpose, output context, and parameter details. Structure is clear and front-loaded.

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, the description appropriately mentions the key output fields (identifiers, Swiss UID). It covers all necessary aspects for a listing tool with filters, though could briefly mention pagination behavior (already in 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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains each parameter: identifier, uid (with example), language, page (1-based), and page_size (1-100). This compensates entirely for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'List the public bodies that publish into I14Y', providing a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_datasets and list_catalogs by focusing on publishers, and hints at its role supplying identifiers needed by other tools.

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 that the output contains 'publisher identifiers needed by the other tools' and notes the UID as a join key to register-mcp. This gives context for when to use it, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with alternatives.

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