Search traits

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, which already convey that the tool is safe and side-effect free. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating it searches via REST API. No further cautions, rate limits, or response details are provided.

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, clear sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and effectively communicates the purpose.

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 simple two-parameter input schema and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the primary use case but lacks detail on the 'limit' parameter. No usage guidelines or behavioral nuances are provided, leaving some gaps.

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. It explains 'term' (by term with example) but does not describe 'limit' (default 25, integer). The parameter semantics for 'limit' are entirely absent, making it incomplete.

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's action (search), the resource (traits in the PGS Catalog REST API), and provides an example term 'type 2 diabetes'. It is sufficiently specific to distinguish from sibling tools like 'search_scores' or 'trait_info'.

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 usage for searching traits by term and gives an example, but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'search_scores' for scores, 'trait_info' for specific trait details). Usage context is present but not formally contrasted.

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