Search traits

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It explains the exact-substring matching and retry of variants, which is useful. It also clarifies default output (counts of PGS IDs) and how to get full arrays via include_pgs_ids, adding behavioral nuance not covered by 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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the purpose and then providing helpful behavioral details. No unnecessary information or redundancy—every sentence earns its place.

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 an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the core behavior (matching, retry, default counts), and the parameter effect for include_pgs_ids. For a simple read-only search tool, this is sufficiently 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% because the description does not explain term or limit. It does explain include_pgs_ids partially by describing 'full arrays.' However, term is self-evident from context, and limit remains unaddressed. Given the low coverage, the description should compensate more; it only partially does for include_pgs_ids, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Search the PGS Catalog REST API for traits by term,' specifying the verb (search), resource (traits), and scope (by term). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_scores (for scores) and trait_info (likely for specific trait details), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 finding traits by term but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like trait_info or mention when not to use it. It provides context about matching behavior but lacks direct exclusions or alternative recommendations, though the purpose is clear enough.

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