CKAN MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions fetching metadata but doesn't specify whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, what errors might occur, or the format of the returned data. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy 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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'complete dataset metadata' includes, potential response formats, or error conditions. For a tool that fetches data by ID, more context is needed to understand its full scope and limitations.

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 has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining what 'complete dataset metadata' entails or how the 'summary' parameter affects the output. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('fetch') and resource ('complete dataset metadata by ID'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'list_datasets' or 'find_relevant_datasets' that might also retrieve dataset information, so it falls short of 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. With siblings like 'list_datasets' for listing and 'find_relevant_datasets' for searching, the agent is left to infer usage based on the name alone, which is insufficient for optimal tool selection.

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