bc_get_term_hierarchical_children

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It explains that the tool returns a dict with parent term, children array, total_children, page_info, or error message. However, it does not disclose potential large payloads, rate limits, authentication needs, or details about pagination beyond mentioning 'page_info'. The description is adequate but could be more transparent.

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?

The description is extremely concise: a single sentence for purpose and a short list for return values. No unnecessary words, and the most critical information is front-loaded. Every sentence contributes value.

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 that an output schema exists (per context signals), the description's coverage of return structure is good. It explains the main components but could elaborate on what 'hierarchical children' entails (e.g., subclasses vs. other relationships). For a simple retrieval tool, it is mostly complete.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with good descriptions for all three parameters. The description does not add new meaning beyond the schema; it only restates the return structure that includes page_info, which indirectly relates to the 'size' parameter. With high schema coverage, baseline is 3, and no extra semantic value is provided.

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 the tool retrieves hierarchical children of an ontology term from OLS, using specific verbs and resource. It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like bc_get_term_details (which likely returns flat details) and bc_search_ontology_terms (which searches for terms).

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 getting hierarchical children but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. Sibling tools exist but no comparative advice is given.

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