ebi-pdbe-search_schema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond them by describing the returned schema's contents and table layout, which an agent needs in order to interpret the response.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and the follow-up routing is stated early. However, the second paragraph repeats the first, and the output-format bullets are followed by two sentences of filler ('easy to read and understand', 'allowing users to quickly grasp'), which dilute the useful content.

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 and no parameters, the description carries the burden of describing return values, and it does so with an explicit column listing (Field Name, Type, Stored, Indexed, Description). It omits practical notes such as output size or whether the schema is cached, but nothing essential for correct invocation 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline this scores 4. There is nothing parameter-related the description could usefully add, and it does not mislead about inputs.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: retrieving the Solr search schema for the PDBe search service. It distinguishes itself clearly from the query-execution path by framing itself as the prerequisite step for constructing effective queries.

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?

It says explicitly when to use it (to understand available fields) and names the follow-up action, running the query via `run_pdbe_search_query`. However, that named tool does not appear in the provided sibling list (only `ebi-pdbe-search` does), so the alternative is not verifiable for the agent, and no when-not-to-use condition is given.

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