get_cell_specimens

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits like read-only or destructive nature, authentication needs, or pagination limits. The description only says 'Retrieve cell specimens' without any such information. The numRows parameter hints at pagination but is not explained.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It is very concise, but at the expense of missing important details. It could be slightly longer to include usage guidance or behavioral notes without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about what cell specimens are, typical use cases, and expected output structure. The sibling tools are diverse, so more context would help the agent select 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema for the species and numRows parameters. It does not clarify the allowed values for species (though schema provides enum) or the default for numRows.

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 (retrieve) and the resource (cell specimens from the Allen Cell Types Database). It is specific and matches the tool name. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools, which all have 'get_' or 'download_' prefixes, but the description could be more distinctive.

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 like get_ephys_features or get_morphology_features. There is no mention of prerequisites, recommended filters, or when to avoid this tool. The description is purely declarative.

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