discover

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating safe read operations. The description adds minimal additional behavioral context (e.g., 'free-text concept resolution'), but does not disclose details like result count limits, pagination, or how the resolution works.

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 extremely concise (two noun phrases), which is efficient but lacks structure. It front-loads the key action but omits any sentences or additional details, making it borderline insufficient.

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 many sibling tools and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return format, result count, or how discover differs from specific entity searches, leaving the agent uncertain about its utility.

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 100% and the schema already describes the 'query' parameter with examples. The description's phrase 'free-text query' adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline without improvement.

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 'Free-text concept resolution - find entities matching a free-text query' clearly identifies the tool's purpose as resolving free-text queries to entities, distinguishing it from specific entity search siblings. However, it does not specify what types of entities (e.g., biomedical concepts) are resolved.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like disease_search or drug_search. It does not mention any context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the free-text nature.

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