Index of Terms

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the payload contents and the fact that it surfaces still-empty concepts, which is behavioral information an agent would not get from the 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?

Two sentences, no filler, and the payload description is front-loaded ahead of the usage instruction. Every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and the description still summarizes them. For a read-only, fully documented list tool this is nearly complete; only paging behavior and the optional-datasource case are left entirely to the schema.

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%, with kind, status, limit, offset and datasource all documented in the schema itself. The description adds no filtering or paging semantics beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 resource (the datasource's Term index) and enumerates exactly what each entry carries: one-line definition, status, synonyms, record and relation counts, and empty concepts. This is clearly distinguishable from get_term (single Term) and search_ontology (search) among the siblings.

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 an explicit when-to-use rule: read it before adding knowledge so existing Terms are reused rather than duplicated. It does not name a specific alternative tool or state when not to use it, which keeps it short of a 5.

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