Resolve Diseases (batch)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds critical behavioral details: partial success (each item returns own ok/error), no wholesale failure, and compact per-item response. This goes beyond the 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 tightly written sentences with no wasted words. Every phrase (partial success, max 50, signature) adds essential information. Ideal structure.

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 output schema, high schema coverage, and annotations, the description fully covers what the agent needs: purpose, behavior, limits, and response. No gaps for this relatively simple batch tool.

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%, so the description does not need to detail parameters. However, it adds value by explaining the return structure per item (orpha_code, name, match_type) and the effect of response_mode, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 'Resolve many labels/ORPHAcodes/xrefs in one call', specifying the verb (resolve), resource (diseases in batch), and how it differs from single-item siblings like resolve_disease and resolve_xref.

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 mentions 'Max 50 items' and the response_mode parameter, providing clear usage bounds. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use this tool (e.g., for a single item use resolve_disease) or compare to siblings beyond the batch nature.

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