Gene / CDS / Protein Sequence

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: default parameters, seq_type enum options (including that 'protein' is the canonical-transcript product), and organism flexibility. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise (two sentences of functional content plus one sentence of usage guidance) and front-loaded. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy.

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 low parameter count, high schema coverage, and presence of output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, parameters with defaults, usage scenario, and chaining to sibling tools. No gaps remain for the agent to guess.

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%, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying the default values for organism and seq_type, and explaining the seq_type mapping to BLAST types (protein for blastp, cds/cdna for blastn). This provides practical usage context not present 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?

The description clearly states the tool fetches a locus's sequence from Ensembl Plants, specifying verb 'Fetch' and resource 'sequence'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on sequence retrieval, which is unique among the listed tools.

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 provides explicit guidance on chaining the output to blast_sequence for different seq_types, and mentions defaults for organism. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternative uses but gives strong contextual cues for when to use this tool.

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