deconvolve_data

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and open world (openWorldHint=true), but the description adds no behavioral context. It does not explain what gets modified (e.g., adds cell type proportion columns), side effects, or performance considerations.

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: two sentences with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded and every word serves a purpose.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks context about prerequisites, data modification, return values, or common usage patterns. For a tool with many configuration options and side effects, it is incomplete.

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 for top-level parameters is 0%, so the description must compensate. It highlights three required sub-parameters (method, cell_type_key, reference_data_id) that are not all marked required in the schema. However, it only says 'see DeconvolutionParameters' without further explanation, adding moderate value.

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 action (deconvolve), the resource (spatial spots), and the outcome (estimate cell type proportions). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like annotate_cell_types or analyze_spatial_statistics.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., need for loaded reference data) or scenarios where deconvolution is appropriate.

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