Genomic Region → Features

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context: the API caps the span and will error on oversized regions, and defaults to arabidopsis_thaliana. This goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 compact at about 6 sentences, with the purpose in the first sentence. It includes necessary warnings and defaults without unnecessary verbiage. However, parameter descriptions could be omitted since they are fully covered in the schema.

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 the tool has 5 parameters, a required set, and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the purpose, parameter roles, a use case, a behavioral caveat, and defaults. It does not explain the output format, but the output schema suffices. It adequately distinguishes from sibling tools.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minor clarifications like '1-based inclusive' for start/end and provides an example region '1', but largely restates schema information.

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 clearly states 'List features overlapping a genomic interval' which uses a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly contrasting with 'per-locus lookup', and provides concrete use cases like 'what genes are in this QTL interval'.

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?

The description explains when to use this tool ('without a per-locus lookup') and provides defaults for feature and organism. It warns about oversized region errors. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools beyond the implicit per-locus methods.

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