wsl_get_dataset

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 value by noting that it returns non-public resource metadata if present, which is an important behavioral detail beyond the 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 concise with a clear structure: a main sentence, followed by use_case, important_notes, and example sections. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 and the description explains the return type (metadata and resources including download URLs) and includes an example, the description is complete for an agent to understand what the tool does and what it returns.

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?

Although the schema description coverage is reported as 0%, the schema actually includes descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds context by linking id_or_slug to search results and providing an example, which enhances understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 returns complete metadata and resources of an EnviDat dataset, specifies the use case as a detail view after search, and lists outputs like DOI, license, authors, and download links. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like wsl_search.

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?

Explicitly states it's a follow-up step after wsl_search and provides important notes on how to obtain the id_or_slug parameter from search results (field 'name') and that it returns non-public resource metadata if available, giving clear when-to-use and how-to-use guidance.

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