Generate DNA Evo2

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the workflow nature (generation vs scoring) but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as resource usage, API costs, or limitations. The bar is lowered due to annotations, but still basic.

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 concise with a single sentence that covers the core functionality. It could be front-loaded with an action verb but is efficient for the main purpose.

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?

Despite having 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is extremely brief. It does not explain what the tool returns, how to interpret results, or any necessary context for operation. The agent lacks guidance on expected output format.

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 schema already documents all 10 parameters. The description adds value by explaining the functional difference between the two modes (generate vs score), but does not elaborate on other parameters like num_tokens or temperature, which are self-explanatory in 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?

Description clearly states it is an Evo2 DNA workflow with two distinct modes: generate and score. It separates generation from scoring, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that are focused on analysis, not DNA sequence generation.

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 instructions on when to use each mode via the 'mode' parameter. However, it does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives to guide the agent in choosing this tool over others.

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