list_dimension_values

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose useful behavior: pagination via limit (1-500)/offset and the period key encoding ('2023JJ00', '2023KW01', '2023MM01'). However, it does not state read-only safety, whether values are exhaustive, or result ordering.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then the integration note, then a compact Args block. Every element earns its place, though the Args section is slightly list-like rather than prose.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description covers the key format, the link to query_data.filters, and all five parameters, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it explains table_id, dimension (with an example pulled from get_table_info), search (matches key/title/group with an example), limit (bounded 1-500), and offset (pagination). This adds meaningful semantics absent from the bare schema.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Lijst de geldige waarden van een dimensie') with concrete examples of what a dimension is (regions, periods, gender, industries). It distinguishes itself from siblings by pointing to query_data.filters for the returned keys and get_table_info as the source of the dimension key.

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 ties the tool into the workflow: the returned 'key' is used in query_data.filters, and the dimension argument comes from get_table_info. This gives clear context for when to reach for this tool, though it does not state exclusions or contrast directly against search_tables or get_table_measures.

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