get_dataset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions fetching metadata and including deleted datasets. It doesn't state whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or returns specific data beyond 'metadata'. The presence of an output schema partially compensates, but the description is too sparse.

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, lean sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose. However, given the lack of usage guidelines or behavioral details, it could be considered under-specified rather than concise.

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 fetch tool with 1 parameter and a provided output schema, the description is mostly adequate. The output schema likely explains the return structure. However, the lack of any guidance on how this differs from 'list_datasets' or why you'd fetch a deleted dataset makes it slightly incomplete for a complex API.

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 1 parameter and 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents 'dataset_id' well. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what's in the schema; it merely restates the resource being fetched. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema does the heavy lifting.

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 retrieves dataset metadata and explicitly includes deleted datasets. The verb 'get' and resource 'dataset metadata' are unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate itself from 'list_datasets' or other querying siblings, which could be clearer.

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 siblings like 'list_datasets', 'get_category', or 'preview_image'. It doesn't specify prerequisites (e.g., does the dataset need to exist? Can it fetch metadata for a deleted dataset without special permissions?) or exclusions. The phrase 'including a deleted dataset' hints at a unique capability but lacks explicit context.

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