Search APIs (data services)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions that it searches for live endpoints serving Norwegian public data, but omits details on rate limits, authentication, error handling, or what happens on empty results. The description lacks sufficient transparency for an unannotated tool.

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 efficient sentences: the first states the purpose and provides examples, the second gives a clear follow-up action. No redundant information; front-loaded and 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?

With no output schema, the description should indicate the response structure (e.g., presence of id, total results). It only mentions IDs for endpoint URLs, leaving the agent uninformed about other fields or pagination details. The description is incomplete for a search tool.

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 100% with each parameter having a description. The description adds domain context (Norwegian public data) and notes that returned IDs can be used with get_api, but does not add new meaning to the parameters themselves. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Search') and resource ('APIs / data services' on data.norge.no), with specific examples (Statistics Norway, Kartverket, Brønnøysundregistrene) that distinguish it from siblings like search_datasets (which searches datasets).

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 a follow-up action ('Use get_api with a returned id for endpoint URLs') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like search_datasets or fetch_data. Usage context is implied but not fully elaborated.

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