Get CKAN Portal Statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it performs a single CKAN call (package_search with rows=0 and facets) and returns statistical data, confirming no mutation. 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?

Description is front-loaded with the key purpose. It includes a usage workflow and return description. It could be slightly more concise by removing the 'Args' repetition, but overall every sentence adds value.

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 read-only stats tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the response structure (total count, ranked breakdowns), provides a typical workflow, and mentions sibling tools. This is adequate for an agent to understand the tool's role.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists parameters but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., defaults, constraints). The description does not clarify parameter formats or provide examples.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns a statistical overview of a CKAN portal with total dataset count and breakdowns by category, format, and organization. It distinguishes itself from siblings like ckan_package_search, which queries specific data, and ckan_analyze_datasets.

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?

Description provides a typical workflow showing when to use this tool (for understanding the portal) versus ckan_package_search (for specific queries). It also notes that no query is needed and it's a single CKAN call. However, it doesn't explicitly state conditions where the tool should not be used.

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