bag_health_mcp__get_disease_data

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by specifying data updates every Wednesday and explaining the meaning of 'incValue' (incidence per 100k) vs 'value' (absolute count), which are useful behaviors beyond 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?

The description is concise at around 100 words, well-structured with clearly labeled sections (use_case, important_notes, example), and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy.

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 complex time-series data retrieval tool with multiple filters, the description covers data source, update frequency, metric meanings, prerequisites (call get_series_details), and provides an example. The presence of an output schema means the return format does not need to be described here, making it 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?

The input schema already includes descriptions for all parameters (canton, sex, age_group, etc.), so the baseline is 3. The description enhances this by clarifying that 'incValue' is incidence per 100k and 'value' is absolute count, and it provides a concrete example that ties the parameters together.

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 'Fetch time-series surveillance data for a disease from the BAG IDD' with a specific verb and resource. The use_case section emphasizes it as the core data-retrieval tool, distinguishing it from siblings like bag_health_mcp__get_series_details which provides valid filters.

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 explicitly directs to call bag_health_mcp__get_series_details first for valid filters, and the use_case states the tool is for getting actual numbers/trends. While it does not explicitly list alternatives, the context from sibling names and the prerequisite hint provide clear usage guidance.

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