Describe one Catence dataset

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the burden, and it explicitly declares 'Read-only,' which is strong transparency for a read operation. It also scopes the operation to one cataloged dataset, though it does not mention errors, rate limits, or response structure.

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 with no wasted words. The core action and read-only trait are front-loaded, and the prerequisite is placed at the end without disrupting clarity.

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 simple two-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, safety, and prerequisites, and even lists the returned content areas. However, the ambiguous 'dataset' parameter and absence of an output schema leave a meaningful gap for an agent that must call this 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. It clarifies that athleteId comes from list_athletes, but the 'dataset' parameter is only referred to as 'one cataloged dataset' without explaining what values are valid, where they come from, or how they are formatted.

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 tool reads schema, filters, provenance, and coverage for one dataset, and marks it read-only. It is specific about the resource and verb, but it does not differentiate itself from the sibling tool 'describe_data' by name.

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?

It provides a useful prerequisite by saying athleteId must come from list_athletes, implying a call order. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the similar-sounding describe_data or other data-description tools.

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