CKAN MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It mentions 'first active datastore resource' which hints at selection logic, but doesn't explain what 'active' means, error handling, performance characteristics, authentication needs, or what format the records are returned in. For an 11-parameter tool with no annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 a single, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 complexity (11 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what constitutes a 'record', what format they're returned in, how 'first active' is determined, error conditions, or performance expectations. For a data retrieval tool with many parameters, more context is needed.

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 schema already documents all 11 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain how parameters interact, provide examples, or clarify edge cases. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

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 the action ('Get records') and target ('from the first active datastore resource in a dataset'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'get_resource_records' which appears to serve a similar purpose, preventing a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_resource_records' or other dataset-related tools. There's no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or comparative use cases, leaving the agent without contextual usage direction.

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