get_disease_info

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds 'core metadata' but discloses no other behavioral traits such as pagination, filtering, or side effects. It doesn't contradict the annotation.

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 clear sentence with no filler words, immediately stating what the tool does. It is well-structured and appropriately sized for a simple retrieval operation.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description fails to mention the optional fields parameter or any usage caveats. This makes the tool feel incomplete for an AI agent, especially given the large sibling set.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of efo_id or the fields parameter. The agent is left to infer the meaning, which is inadequate for a required parameter plus an optional fields selector.

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 'Retrieve' and identifies the resource as 'core metadata for an Open Targets disease entity', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_disease_known_drugs or get_disease_ontology that target specific data types.

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 implies use for general disease metadata but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives or any exclusion criteria. There is no mention of sibling tools or when not to use this tool.

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