disease_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, lowering the bar. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'detailed information', not disclosing potential pagination via the limit parameter or the effect of the sections parameter. 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, no unnecessary words. Efficient and to the point.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, given the large number of sibling tools (23), more context about return format or how this differs from other disease retrievals 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 input schema provides descriptions for 2 of 3 parameters (disease_id with examples, sections with enum), achieving 67% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter information. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get detailed disease information by ID' clearly states the verb (Get), resource (disease information), and method (by ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like disease_search, which searches rather than retrieves, and other disease_* tools that focus on specific aspects like drugs or trials.

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 usage guidelines provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as disease_drugs or disease_trials, nor when not to use it. For a tool with many siblings, explicit guidance would help the agent select correctly.

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