SCB: hva inneholder tabellen?

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful context such as source, license, and the fact that this is a pre-data-retrieval step, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, what the response shape is, or any error/rate-limit behavior. The 'info' nature of the tool mitigates this gap.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, then gives the critical ordering instruction, and ends with a compact source/license note. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant filler.

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 single-parameter metadata tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it explains what the tool returns and when to use it. It could be more explicit about the exact response format, but the core contextual information an agent needs to invoke it correctly is present.

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 single parameter 'sti' is described in the schema as 'Tabellsti fra scb_finn_tabell', and coverage is 100%. The description does not add additional parameter-level semantics beyond reinforcing that this tool should be run before data retrieval, so it stays at the baseline.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Lister variablene i en SCB-tabell ... med eksempelverdier.' This clearly states what the tool returns and distinguishes it from sibling data-fetching tools like scb_tabell_verdier and scb_tabell_data by positioning it as the prerequisite step before retrieving data.

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 gives an explicit when-to-use rule: 'Kjør denne FØR du henter data' and a concrete consequence if ignored ('ellers må du gjette dimensjonskodene'). It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use or named alternatives, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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