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 successfully adds critical behavioral context about visibility ('Messages appear in a shared chatroom visible to all agents and the human operator') that is not inferable from the schema. Lacks details on persistence or delivery guarantees, but covers the essential social/visibility dynamics.

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 well-structured sentences with zero redundancy: core function (sentence 1), usage patterns (sentence 2), and side effects/visibility (sentence 3). Information is front-loaded with the essential action, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

Appropriately complete for a 3-parameter communication tool without output schema. Covers functional purpose, usage scenarios, and visibility side effects. Could be improved by mentioning error handling (e.g., invalid agent IDs) or message persistence, but adequately covers the essential operational context.

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 has 100% description coverage (baseline 3). Description adds domain-specific value by guiding message content ('include specific variants/genes/findings') appropriate to the bioinformatics toolset context, and reinforces the broadcast capability mentioned in the 'to' parameter description.

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?

Description opens with specific verb-noun pair ('Send a message') and immediately clarifies scope ('to another agent or broadcast to all'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling 'get_messages' by specifying this is an outbound communication action rather than 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 use-case guidance ('Use to share discoveries, ask questions, or alert others to important cross-domain connections') establishing when to invoke the tool. However, it lacks explicit exclusions or differentiation from close sibling 'publish_finding', leaving ambiguity about when to publish versus send messages.

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