get_drug_pharmacogenomics

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns with that. The description adds that the data links genetic variants to drug response, but it does not disclose pagination behavior or response structure. Since an output schema exists, the lack of explicit return details is somewhat mitigated.

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 unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the primary action and resource, making it highly scannable.

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 simple retrieval tool with an output schema and readOnly annotation, the description is minimal but covers the core purpose. However, it lacks usage guidance and parameter semantics, and does not clarify the difference from the variant-focused sibling tool. It 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate. It does not explain that chembl_id is likely a drug identifier, nor does it clarify the semantics of page_size and page_index. The tool name implies drug context, but the description itself is silent on 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 clearly states the action ('Retrieve') and the resource ('pharmacogenomics data linking genetic variants to drug response'). It is specific enough to distinguish from similar sibling tools like get_drug_info, though it does not explicitly name alternatives like get_variant_pharmacogenomics.

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 such as get_variant_pharmacogenomics or get_drug_info. The description does not mention preferred contexts, exclusions, or relationships to other tools.

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