query_gwas

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

No annotations provided. Description only describes output, not behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication, or potential limitations. Relies on inference from verb 'look up'.

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 with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the primary action, then details.

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 a simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what is returned (traits, p-values, etc.). Lacks mention of potential constraints or availability, but sufficient for basic 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% with clear parameter description 'dbSNP rsID'. Description does not add additional semantic value to the parameter beyond mentioning 'variant'.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Look up', resource 'GWAS Catalog associations for a variant', and lists output content. Distinguishes effectively from siblings like query_clinvar or query_snpedia.

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?

Description implies usage for GWAS data but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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