query_genes_by_chemical

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the core function. It omits details about default species, result limits, or the relationship between chemical_id and chemical_name.

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 concise sentence with no fluff, front-loading the main action. However, it may be too terse to cover important context, but that is a completeness issue.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return values, interactions between parameters, or how to filter by species/chemical. The presence of a closely named sibling adds to the ambiguity.

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 0% and the description adds no parameter explanations. While parameter names like chemical_id and interaction_type are self-explanatory to some extent, the description does not clarify expected formats, allowed values, or how parameters combine.

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 uses a specific verb 'Find' with a clear object 'genes that interact with chemicals/drugs', which conveys the core functionality. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_gene_chemical_interactions', which likely performs a similar function.

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_gene_chemical_interactions' or 'query_genes_by_disease'. The description is purely functional with no usage context.

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