get_genomes_for_species

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get' and clarifies the data scope, but does not state return format, pagination behavior, or explicitly confirm no side effects.

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, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the main use case. No filler or redundancy; 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?

For a low-complexity, single-parameter lookup with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It misses explicit routing to get_genomes_for_taxon for broader queries, but otherwise covers purpose and usage adequately.

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?

The single 'species' parameter is fully documented in the schema with examples, so the schema already carries the semantic load. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline 3 for high coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get all genome assemblies'), scoped to a species in GTDB. An agent can distinguish it from get_genome (single genome) and get_genomes_for_taxon (higher taxonomic level) without inspecting schemas.

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 a clear use case ('finding reference genomes and type strains'), which gives useful context for when to call it. However, it does not name alternatives or state when not to use it (e.g., for broader taxa).

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