disease_drugs

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that the data comes from OpenTargets, which is behavioral context but does not disclose other important traits like rate limits, pagination, or data freshness. It does not contradict annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the core function.

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?

While the tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema, the description lacks information about the expected output format or any caveats. Given the large number of sibling tools, more context on when this tool is appropriate would improve completeness.

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 provides minimal descriptions for disease_id ('Disease ID') and limit (just 'limit'), with 50% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional explanation about the parameters, leaving their meaning and usage unclear, especially for limit.

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 that the tool retrieves drugs for a given disease via OpenTargets, using a specific action verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like disease_trials or gene_drugs by specifying the data source and relationship.

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 should be used when drug information for a disease is needed, referencing OpenTargets as the data source. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like gene_drugs or disease_trials, nor does it provide exclusions.

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