chebi_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries behavioral disclosure and does state that the output is a list of maching compounds including ChEBI ID, name, and definition. It does not cover result limits, pagination, or whether matching is exac/fuzzy, which are relevant but not critical for a simple search.

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 short and front-loaded with the action, but the English and Chinese sentences are largely redundant. The Chinese version adds only the examples and a generic purpose, so some words are not earning their place.

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 one-parameter search tool with an output schema, the description covers the input semantics and the shape of the result (list, ID, name, definition). It lacks alternative-tool routing and search-behavior caveats, but it is still reasonably complete for this simplicity level.

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 one required 'name' parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description compensates by defining it as a compound name or keyword and giving concrete examples (ATP/glucose), making it clear what to pass.

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?

States a specific operation ('Search ChEBI compounds') and the expected result (matching list with ID, name, definition). It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like chebi_compound, which may also relate to ChEBI data.

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 use case is implied: query when you have a compound name or keyword, and the Chinese phrase '用于化合物查询' reinforces a lookup intent. However, it gives no when-not guidance or alternatives (e.g., use chebi_compound for known ChEBI ID lookups), so usage guidance remains implicit.

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