fgis_query_dataset

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral value by revealing that document hits are summaries and that full content requires a separate tool, which an agent would not know from the schema or 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff.

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?

The tool has 8 parameters, no output schema, and no schema-level parameter descriptions. The description omits required parameter semantics, result shape, pagination, and how 'offline' behaves, leaving an agent under-informed for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 8 parameters, the description should compensate but only hints at resource categories (norms/prices/documents), which likely maps to `kind`. It provides no meaning for `code`, `query`, `limit`, `offset`, `zone_id`, `period_id`, or `dataset_id`.

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?

States a specific purpose: offline search over norms/prices/documents, and notes that documents return summaries. This differentiates it from full-content readers, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from fgis_search_norms or fgis_search_document.

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?

Provides context that it is an offline search and tells the agent to use a document tool for full content. It does not give explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use criteria relative to sibling search tools, leaving the choice partly inferred.

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