whodb_platform_ontologies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description's one extra claim - workspace is per-call targeting without changing defaults - largely restates the workspace schema field, and it says nothing about result size, truncation or pagination behavior for a 10-parameter list tool.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scoping, then filter advice, then targeting note. Little waste, though the final sentence partly duplicates the workspace schema description.

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?

With 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essential 'what and where' for a read-only list tool. The main gap is pagination/return-shape context, which the limit/offset params partially imply.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all ten parameters and the baseline is 3. The description only calls out name and status filtering, adding no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (ontology object types) scoped to 'the selected hosted project', which distinguishes it from the shared-ontology siblings like whodb_platform_shared_ontologies and whodb_platform_discover_shared_ontologies. It does not, however, clarify the boundary versus the singular whodb_platform_ontology or whodb_platform_ontology_describe.

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?

Gives filter advice ('Use name and status filters when known') but never states when to reach for this versus sibling enumeration tools (whodb_platform_ontology, whodb_platform_shared_ontologies). Usage is implied by the 'list' framing rather than explicitly guided.

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