OECD-Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Get') and specifies the data source (OECD) and scope (17 categories covering topics). However, it lacks details on response format, pagination, or potential errors, leaving behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Get all available OECD data categories') and adds useful context (number and examples of categories). Every word contributes meaning without waste.

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 read tool with 0 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the what and scope but omits details like response format or error handling, which could help an agent use it correctly despite the low complexity.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description adds value by clarifying the resource (OECD data categories) and scope (all available, 17 categories), which isn't in the schema, justifying a score above 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'OECD data categories', specifying the scope as 'all available' and listing example topics. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_categories_detailed' by implying a broader, less detailed list, but doesn't explicitly contrast them.

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 description's scope ('all available OECD data categories') and example topics, suggesting it's for browsing categories rather than detailed metadata or data retrieval. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like 'list_categories_detailed' or 'search_dataflows'.

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