reactome_search_spellcheck

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'get' suggests a read-only, non-destructive operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it is safe, nor does it describe any limitations, rate limits, or what kind of suggestions are returned. It adds minimal value beyond the basic action.

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, focused sentence that states the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundancy. Every word contributes to understanding, earning top marks for conciseness.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides a basic understanding but lacks details about return values, suggestion format, or how results should be interpreted. It is minimally sufficient but leaves room for clarification about what the spell-check suggestions actually contain.

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 input schema already fully documents the only parameter 'query' as a 'Search term to check' with a maxLength. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond this, so the high schema coverage (100%) keeps the score at baseline 3.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('spell-check suggestions for a search query'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling search tools like reactome_search_suggest by focusing specifically on spell-checking, 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 implies the tool is used to obtain spelling corrections for a search query, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus other sibling search tools, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It gives only implied usage context with no alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance.

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