search_qsurs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond repeating that it is a read/retrieval operation, saying nothing about prediction coverage, model versions, or what happens when no prediction exists for a chemical.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity tips into under-specification for a domain-jargon 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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, but the description still leaves 'QSUR' undefined and gives no routing guidance among the many related functional-use and search tools. For a search tool in this dense sibling cluster, that is a real gap.

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 coverage is 100% and both optional parameters (dtxsid, dtxsids) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no format or filtering nuance, so this is the baseline 3 where the schema carries the load.

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 verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'QSUR model functional-use probability predictions' give a rough idea of the resource, but 'QSUR' is unexplained jargon and the description does nothing to distinguish it from close siblings like get_exposure_functional_use_probability or search_msready. An agent can guess it returns QSUR predictions but cannot tell why it exists alongside the other functional-use tools.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. Given the crowded sibling set of search_* and functional-use tools, the agent is left to infer when this one applies versus get_exposure_functional_use or search_msready.

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