Genomic-Agent-Discovery

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and discloses the key behavioral trait: returning a warning if duplicate research exists. It implies write-side effects through 'Log' but could explicitly state this creates a persistent record. 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?

Three sentences with zero waste: sentence 1 states purpose, sentence 2 gives timing instruction, sentence 3 explains return behavior. Information is perfectly front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Given the simple single-parameter schema and lack of output schema, the description adequately compensates by describing the return value behavior ('warning if...similar'). Minor gap in not describing the success case (what happens when no duplicate exists).

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% with the query parameter fully documented. The description aligns with the schema ('search query or URL') but adds no additional syntax details or examples beyond what the schema already provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 uses a specific verb ('Log') with a clear resource ('web search') and explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'get_web_searches' by emphasizing this is a proactive logging action ('you are about to perform') versus retrieval.

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?

Provides explicit temporal guidance ('Call BEFORE every web search') and clear value proposition ('avoid duplicate research across agents'). It effectively communicates when to use this tool versus skipping it.

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