mosaic_pathway_context

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, signaling safe operation. The description adds value by describing output content (pathways, targets, interactions), but does not discuss potential limitations such as data freshness or scope.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the primary purpose, and the second adds relevant detail. Highly efficient.

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?

Given the availability of an output schema, the description adequately outlines the scope (pathways, other targets, interactions). It lacks some operational details (e.g., how results are presented) but is sufficient for a straightforward retrieval tool.

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 description coverage is 0% per context signals, meaning the tool description should compensate. However, the description does not mention the required 'gene_symbol' parameter or its format, relying entirely on the schema's own description (which is present but not referenced). The description fails to add value beyond schema.

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 it retrieves pathway context for a drug target, listing specific outputs (pathways, other targets, interactions). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like mosaic_target_network, which reduces clarity in selecting among alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., mosaic_target_network) or exclusions. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage contexts.

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