get_gene_pathways

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it retrieves pathways, but gives no details about how the 'sources' parameter affects behavior, potential error conditions, or the nature of the returned data. This is insufficient for a tool with a non-trivial optional filter.

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, making it concise. However, it is under-specified to the point of being minimally informative, which is not ideal conciseness—it's more like an omission of needed content.

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?

Although an output schema is present, the description omits crucial context about the optional 'sources' parameter and does not clarify the relationship to sibling tools. For a tool with only two parameters, this brevity leaves significant gaps in understanding when and how to use it.

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 has zero description coverage for its parameters, and the tool description does not explain the meaning of 'gene_id' or 'sources'. The word 'gene' vaguely maps to 'gene_id', but 'sources' is completely unaddressed, leaving the agent without any semantic grounding for the parameters.

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 'Get all pathways for a gene' clearly states the action (get) and resource (pathways for a gene), making the tool's purpose obvious. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'query_genes_by_pathway', which reverses the query direction, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'query_genes_by_pathway' or other gene-related tools. The description provides no context for selecting this tool over others, so it fails to offer usage criteria.

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