bag_health_mcp__list_diseases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds context about output grouping but does not contradict annotations. Additional behavioral detail (e.g., no side effects) is already covered.

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 (~3 sentences plus XML), front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. The XML tags appropriately structure usage and example.

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 no parameters, a non-empty output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does, its output, and its role in the workflow.

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?

There are no meaningful parameters (only an empty params object). The description does not need to document parameters and instead focuses on the output, effectively compensating for the 0% schema coverage.

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 it lists all 51 disease topics from the BAG Infectious Disease Dashboard, and explains output (slug, category). This is specific and distinct from sibling tools that handle series or data queries.

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 XML tags <use_case> and <important_notes> explicitly instruct the agent to start here and note that slugs are required for other tools, providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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