get_disease_phenotypes

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation, and the description does not contradict this. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the annotation, such as pagination behavior or result format, so it provides minimal extra value.

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 unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the tool's core function without redundancy.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, and the description covers the primary purpose. However, it does not mention pagination or the required efo_id parameter, which are present in the schema but not described. For a basic list-fetching tool, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention or explain any parameters. It does not clarify that efo_id is required or what page_size/page_index control. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Fetch' and specifies the resource 'HPO phenotype annotations' linked to 'a disease', making it clear what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_disease_info or get_disease_known_drugs by naming the exact data type.

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 over alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an EFO ID, or when to prefer other disease-related tools. The description simply states the action without contextual usage cues.

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