Get HPO Term Descendants

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent, so the description adds value by explaining the pagination block structure (truncated, next_offset) and how to walk large closures via next_commands. This exceeds what annotations provide.

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 sentences plus a signature line. The main purpose is front-loaded, followed by a usage guideline and response format. Every sentence is necessary, no waste.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior: pagination, walking large sets, and differentiation from sibling. No missing aspects for effective use.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description restates the signature and defaults but does not add new semantic context. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states it returns all transitive is_a descendants (more specific phenotype terms) of an HPO term, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_term_children by specifying that this tool provides descendants via precomputed closure, while get_term_children returns only immediate children.

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 explicitly advises using get_term_children for immediate children, providing a clear alternative. It also describes pagination for handling large closures. While not exhaustive, this is sufficient context for usage.

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