Genomic-Agent-Discovery

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. It adds efficiency comparison context but omits behavioral details like return format, error handling for invalid rsIDs, or privacy implications of accessing patient genotype data. The 'up to 200' limit duplicates schema maxItems.

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 sentences with zero waste. First sentence states purpose and limits; second provides usage guidance. Information is front-loaded and dense.

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?

Adequate for a single-parameter batch lookup tool. Given no output schema, could benefit from brief mention of return structure (e.g., mapping of rsIDs to genotypes), but the clinical sensitivity of 'patient genotypes' makes this sufficiently complete for selection purposes.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is met. The description reinforces the batch nature of the rsids parameter but does not add semantic details beyond the schema's 'Array of rsIDs to look up' (e.g., rsID format, validation rules).

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 specific verb 'Look up' with clear resource 'patient genotypes' and scope 'multiple rsIDs at once (up to 200)'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tool query_genotype by emphasizing batch processing efficiency.

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 clear guidance on when to use ('when checking many variants') and implicitly references the alternative ('individual lookups'), suggesting when the singular query_genotype is more appropriate. Lacks explicit 'when-not' exclusion statement.

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