session_createStart a scratch session that holds several named sequences/values (e.g. vector, insert, forward/reverse primer) for use across multiple tool calls via session_run, instead of re-pasting them into every call. Sessions expire after 24 hours.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| entries | No | Initial named entries, e.g. {"vector": "...", "insert": "..."}. Optional — you can also add entries later with session_set. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds critical behavioral context beyond annotations: sessions expire after 24 hours. Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false, so no contradiction; this is transparent about a key limitation.
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?
Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundant information. Every sentence adds value.
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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, and behavior (including expiration), making it complete for effective use.
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% (one parameter described in schema), baseline 3. The description enhances meaning by providing an example usage (vector, insert) and noting that entries can be added later via session_set, adding practical value.
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 starts a scratch session to hold named sequences/values for reuse across multiple calls via session_run, distinguishing it from related tools by emphasizing the session concept and its purpose.
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 explains when to use the tool (to avoid re-pasting values) and mentions a sibling (session_run), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like session_set.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have highly specific purposes (e.g., crispr_grna_design vs base_editing_design vs prime_editing_design). However, there is some overlap in sequence analysis tools (characterize_sequence, sequence_report) and plasmid annotation tools (plasmid_annotate vs plasmid_deep_annotate) which could cause confusion.
The naming pattern is largely consistent with snake_case verb_noun or noun_descriptor (e.g., primer_design, plasmid_annotate, fastq_trim). However, there are exceptions like 'batch', 'workflow', 'gc_content', and 'cloning_diagnose' which don't follow the verb_noun pattern consistently. Also, some names are phrases like 'golden_gate_from_parts'.
With 101 tools, this server is extremely large and likely overwhelming for agents. Even for a comprehensive bioinformatics toolkit, this exceeds a manageable scope, risking agent confusion and inefficient tool selection. A more modular approach would be advisable.
The tool surface covers a wide range of bioinformatics workflows including sequence analysis, primer design, cloning, CRISPR, NGS, expression analysis, and data export. There are minor gaps such as lack of a dedicated protein structure prediction tool and limited off-target genome coverage, but overall the set is impressively complete for its domain.