Query PhysioNet (Stub)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey all behavioral traits. It only notes the credential requirement, omitting details about side effects, rate limits, or the meaning of 'stub'. The description does not mention the stub nature implied by the title.

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 concise sentence with no redundant words. Every word contributes to identifying the resource and a key constraint. It is well front-loaded given the simplicity of the tool.

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?

Despite the tool having only one parameter and an output schema, the description lacks context about what the query returns, how results are structured, or any special behaviors. The credential note is helpful but insufficient for a complete understanding.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for the single 'query' parameter, describing it as a 'PhysioNet search query'. The description adds no further semantic detail about query format or usage, so it meets the baseline but does not add value beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool as querying PhysioNet for physiological signal datasets, which distinguishes it from sibling tools for other databases. However, it merely restates the resource type without a specific verb beyond what the name implies.

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 mentions a prerequisite (credentials) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. Usage is implied from the tool name and context, but there are no when-not-to or alternative suggestions.

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