bio.gene

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It implies a read-only, non-destructive operation by stating 'lookup' and describes the joined data sources, but lacks details on error handling, result limits, or data freshness. It is adequate but not thorough.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the action, required inputs, and output content without any redundant or missing information.

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 lookup tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main functionality and key output categories (description, chromosome, map location, etc.). It does not specify the exact output structure but is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and usage.

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 has 50% coverage (only 'symbol' has a description). The description adds meaning to 'taxid' by clarifying it is an organism identifier with a default of 9606 for human, and confirms the 'symbol' parameter is the official gene symbol, providing semantic value beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb ('lookup') and resource ('gene'), and defines the scope ('by symbol + organism'). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like 'bio.protein' by explicitly mentioning the joined result including UniProt protein information.

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 clear context for use (gene lookup by symbol and organism with a default taxid of 9606 for human), but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives such as 'bio.protein' for protein-only queries.

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