Retrieve detailed disease information by ID, including core data, gene associations, phenotypes, and pathways.
Get detailed disease information by ID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| sections | No | Sections to include | |
| disease_id | Yes | Disease ID (e.g., "DOID:0060268", "MONDO:0007254", "OMIM:114480", or UMLS CUI "C0018794" — heart block, named via MedGen enrichment) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.0-alpha.10Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falsev1.6.0-alpha.7Input schema / properties / disease_id / minLengthAdded value: +1v1.6.0-alpha.3Input schema / properties / disease_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"Disease ID (e.g., \"DOID:0060268\", \"MONDO:0007254\", \"OMIM:114480\", or UMLS CUI \"C0018794\")"New value: +"Disease ID (e.g., \"DOID:0060268\", \"MONDO:0007254\", \"OMIM:114480\", or UMLS CUI \"C0018794\" — heart block, named via MedGen enrichment)"v1.6.0-alpha.2Input schema / properties / disease_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"Disease ID (e.g., \"DOID:0060268\", \"C0018794\")"New value: +"Disease ID (e.g., \"DOID:0060268\", \"MONDO:0007254\", \"OMIM:114480\", or UMLS CUI \"C0018794\")"v0.7.1Input schema / properties / sections / items / enumPrevious value: -[
- "core",
- "gene_associations",
- "phenotypes",
- "pathways",
- "survival",
- "all"
-]New value: +[
+ "core",
+ "gene_associations",
+ "phenotypes",
+ "pathways",
+ "all"
+]v0.1.8Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of which sections are returned by default, whether missing IDs error or return empty, or that the response is compiled from external sources (open-world).
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness borders on under-specification rather than tightness.
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?
No output schema exists, so the description must carry the burden of explaining what 'detailed disease information' contains, and it does not — sections like gene_associations, phenotypes, and pathways go unmentioned. For a 3-parameter aggregation tool, this leaves the agent guessing about response contents and default scope.
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 67%, so disease_id is well documented in the schema with ID-format examples. However, the description says nothing about the 'sections' selector or the 'limit' cap, which are the two parameters most likely to change call behavior — it only restates the ID lookup.
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?
States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed disease information') and the retrieval key ('by ID'). The 'by ID' phrasing implicitly separates it from disease_search, though no sibling is named explicitly.
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 phrase 'by ID' hints that this is a lookup for a known identifier, but the description never says when to use this instead of disease_search or the related disease_drugs/disease_trials tools, nor what to do if only a name is known.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.