get_target_tep

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation, and the description's 'Fetch' is consistent with that. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as output format, performance, or edge cases, so it does not go beyond what the annotation provides.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource. It contains no extraneous words and is easily parsed by an agent.

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 simple—one parameter, read-only annotation, and an output schema—so the description is minimally sufficient for a basic lookup. However, it does not explain what TEP information includes or when to prefer this tool over the many sibling tools, leaving some 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?

The schema lists one required parameter 'ensembl_id' with 0% description coverage. The description's 'for a gene' only implicitly relates the parameter but does not explain the expected format, that it should be an Ensembl ID, or provide any example. This fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('TEP information for a gene'). It distinguishes this from sibling target tools by the unique 'Target Enabling Package' concept, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other target-related tools. It lacks any mention of alternatives, prerequisites, or use cases, leaving the agent without selection context.

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