search_opendata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the return payload (titles, publishers, dataset ids) and the upstream source (CKAN API), but says nothing about pagination limits, empty result behavior, or whether search is fuzzy/stemmed for the multilingual catalogue.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return shape, then the narrowing option and the data source. No wasted clauses and no repetition of the tool name.

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 compensates by naming the returned fields, and the simple three-parameter search tool is otherwise well covered. It could be stronger by noting the follow-up tools for dataset details/resources or any result-count behavior, but nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented, including the organization slug example and the limit default/max. The description's restatement of the organization narrowing and its example adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: search the Swiss open data catalogue (opendata.swiss) for datasets. The scope is unambiguous and separable from siblings like get_opendata_dataset or list_opendata_resources, though it never names those siblings explicitly to draw the boundary.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'search' plus the note that the organization slug narrows to one publisher, which hints at the discovery use case. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to get_opendata_dataset for retrieving full details of a found dataset.

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