cellxgene_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that it matches published datasets and covers organoid/tumor/immune atlases, but it does not mention limitations, rate limits, or side effects. For a read-only search tool this is acceptable, but not rich.

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 repeats the same information in English and Chinese, making it redundant. It is front-loaded with the main action, but the bilingual duplication and trailing phrases could be tightened without losing meaning.

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 and has an output schema, but the description does not explain 'max_results' or explicitly state usage boundaries relative to other data search tools. It does provide helpful examples of dataset types (organoids, tumor, immune), which adds context, but it is 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%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. It gives semantic context for 'query' (disease/tissue/keywords), but says nothing about 'max_results'. Thus only one of the two parameters gets meaningful explanation.

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 names the exact resource (CELLxGENE single-cell transcriptome datasets) and the action (search), and it specifies matching by disease/tissue/keywords. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like geo_dataset_search and sra_search, which target different repositories.

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 states it is for finding single-cell data (用于单细胞研究找数据) and published datasets, giving clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it does not fully meet the highest bar.

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