reactome_analysis_resources

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only action ('Get') but does not disclose potential error conditions, side effects, or limitations. The description adds some transparency by clarifying the output is a summary, but it lacks depth for a tool with no annotation support.

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 exactly one sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no unnecessary words. It is concise and well-structured for a simple tool.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It does not describe the structure or content of the returned 'summary', which could be important for an agent deciding whether this tool meets its needs.

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 for 'token' is 100% with the description 'Analysis token', fully documenting the parameter. The tool description references 'an analysis' but does not add new meaning or format details beyond the schema. Hence the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'summary of the molecule types (resources) found in an analysis'. This clearly states the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from siblings that return other analysis aspects (e.g., reactome_get_analysis_result, reactome_analysis_found_entities), though it does not explicitly name them.

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 implies the tool is used when a user needs a summary of molecule types from a given analysis token, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives or mention prerequisites such as creating an analysis first. The context is self-evident but not elaborated.

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