Get NIAID Data Record by ID

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by explaining the two response formats (json and markdown), the complete set of fields returned, and the specific error messages for not-found and API failures. This goes beyond annotation-only information, though it does not disclose potential performance or authentication nuances.

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 well-organized into clear sections: a one-sentence overview, args, returns, error responses, and examples. It is front-loaded with the purpose and every section adds practical value. No wasted words or redundant repetition of schema or annotations.

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 relative simplicity of the tool, the description covers all necessary context: what the tool does, when to use it in the broader workflow, parameter usage, return format details, error behaviors, and concrete examples. With an output schema implied and annotations present, no further details are needed.

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?

Although the schema already describes both parameters at 100% coverage, the description significantly enriches them. It clarifies that the id comes from the '_id' field of query results and provides a concrete example. It also explains the difference between 'json' and 'markdown' response formats and their defaults, adding meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 opens with 'Fetch the complete record for a single NIAID Data Ecosystem resource by its ID', a specific verb+resource+method statement. It further distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly noting 'Use this after niaid_data_query to get the full details of a record of interest.'

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?

Clear guidance is provided: 'Use this after niaid_data_query to get the full details of a record of interest.' This names the alternative query tool and indicates the workflow. Examples also show exactly when to use the tool, satisfying the explicit 'when' and 'alternative' requirements.

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