Get Drug Targets

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), description adds that the tool auto-indexes edges into a knowledge graph and specifies the types of values returned, providing useful behavioral context. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise sentences: first lists key outputs, second mentions an important side-effect (auto-indexing). Every part adds value, no filler.

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?

Description is adequate for a simple query tool with good annotations, but missing explicit details about output structure (e.g., list of objects with fields like IC50, Ki). Given no output schema, more detail would help.

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 already describes both parameters well (100% coverage). Description adds value by clarifying that the output includes specific activity types and metadata, helping interpret the results expected from the parameters.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves ChEMBL drug-target activities (IC50, Ki, Kd, assay types, approval status) for a given gene, distinguishing it from siblings that focus on other aspects like drug interactions or disease associations.

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 implies usage for obtaining drug-target activity data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like drug_interaction_checker, leaving the agent to infer context from sibling names.

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