list_assays_for_aops

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that (deduplication and per-AOP empty-result diagnostics), but omits how the min_hitcall threshold filters results, which is the operationally significant trait for this tool.

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?

A single dense sentence with the aggregation behavior front-loaded and no filler. It earns its place, though the trailing 'with per-AOP diagnostics' clause could be integrated more tightly.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a four-parameter aggregation tool with zero parameter documentation, the description leaves meaningful gaps around filtering and pagination behavior.

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 0% and the description explains none of the four parameters. It hints that aop_ids is a collection via 'multiple AOPs', but limit, min_hitcall, and per_aop_limit are undocumented in both schema and description, leaving an agent to guess their effect.

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 states a specific compound verb and resource: 'Aggregate and deduplicate assay candidates across multiple AOPs.' The 'across multiple AOPs' and 'deduplicate' framing differentiates it from the singular siblings list_assays_for_aop / get_assays_for_aop, though it never names them explicitly.

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 only implied by 'across multiple AOPs' — an agent can infer this is for multi-AOP batch queries. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion, and no named alternative (e.g. the singular list_assays_for_aop) to route between.

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