SSB: hent tall fra en tabell

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the output is pre-formatted rows with labels (not raw JSON-stat) and includes source/license info, but does not disclose potential limitations, error behavior, aggregation behavior (though the schema touches on it), or any access requirements. This is insufficient for a tool without annotation safety hints.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences plus source/license. The first sentence delivers the core purpose, the second gives a key usage instruction, and the trailing lines provide provenance. No wasted words.

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 is moderately complex (table selection, variable filters), and there is no output schema. The description covers the basic output format and selection requirement but leaves open details like how table identifiers are structured, whether variable codes come from ssb_tabell_verdier, or how aggregation works. Given the schema provides some supplementary information, it is adequate but not rich.

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 coverage is 50% (tabell lacks a description). The tool description adds a directive about using 'utvalg' to limit selections, which aligns with the schema's explanation of the utvalg parameter. However, it provides no additional meaning for 'tabell', and the description does not compensate for the missing schema description of that parameter.

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's action: 'Henter tall fra en SSB-tabell' (fetches data from an SSB table) and specifies the output format ('ferdige rader med etiketter'). It also distinguishes itself from raw JSON-stat output and from sibling tools like ssb_tabell_info and ssb_tabell_verdier by focusing on data extraction rather than metadata or value lists.

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 some usage context ('Angi ett utvalg per variabel du vil begrense'), indicating that users must specify selections per variable. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like ssb_tabell_info or ssb_tabell_verdier, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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