kegg_pathway_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the basic behavior—keyword search yielding pathway IDs and names—but does not mention result limits, match behavior, language handling, or error cases, which limits transparency for a schema-less description.

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 core action, and the bilingual repetition is not excessive. It conveys the essential purpose in two compact sentences, though the duplicated content in English and Chinese takes up space without adding new information.

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 is mostly adequate for invocation. However, it omits guidance on when not to use the tool, behavior on no results, and any constraints on keyword format, leaving some contextual gaps for an agent selecting among many sibling search tools.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the bare 'keyword' property. It adds meaningful semantics by giving example keywords ('breast cancer', 'apoptosis') and clarifying that the keyword is used to find target pathway IDs, which helps an agent format valid input.

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 searches KEGG pathways by keyword and returns pathway IDs and names, with concrete examples. It is specific enough to identify the tool's function, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like reactome_pathway_search or kegg_pathway_genes.

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 Chinese phrase '用于找到目标通路编号' gives a general usage context: use this tool to discover a KEGG pathway ID. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternative pathway searches or provide exclusions, leaving the selection reasoning mostly implicit.

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