whodb_platform_ontology_fast_lookup_suggestions

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 adds one useful behavioral nuance — workspace targeting is per-call and does not mutate session defaults — but says nothing about what 'suggested' is derived from or how results are ordered/scoped.

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 tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is somewhat redundant with the schema's workspace description, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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?

For a read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the essentials are present. What is missing is the meaning of 'suggested' (suggested relative to what, and how a result should be acted on via create_ontology_fast_lookup), which an agent needs to use the output correctly.

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 id, fields and the nested workspace object are already fully documented in the schema. The description's workspace sentence largely restates what the schema's workspace description already says, adding no new syntax or constraint beyond the baseline.

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 (suggested fast lookups) scoped to one ontology object type, so the agent knows it is a read of suggestions rather than records. However, it does not distinguish itself from the closely named sibling whodb_platform_ontology_fast_lookups or explain that creating requires whodb_platform_create_ontology_fast_lookup.

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 phrase 'for one ontology object type' implies the required id is an ontology object type, and the workspace sentence gives per-call targeting context. But there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not, and no pointer to the alternative tools (ontology_fast_lookups for existing ones, create_ontology_fast_lookup to act on a suggestion).

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