gramene_homologs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the output lacks per-row taxon, identity, and protein ID, and suggests supplementary tools. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention any safety considerations.

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 three sentences with front-loaded purpose and efficient parameter guidance. The third sentence, while longer, provides necessary limitations and pairing suggestions. Could be slightly more terse but overall well-structured.

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 an output schema exists, the description complements it by listing return fields and noting missing details. It also suggests complementary tools for enrichment. For a simple 2-parameter fetch tool, this covers purpose, usage, output, limitations, and next steps comprehensively.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the effect of each homology_type value ('pass 'paralog' for in-species duplicates or 'all' for everything'), and the locus parameter example is clear.

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 'Fetch orthologs and paralogs for a plant locus from Gramene compara (data.gramene.org v69)', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like batch_gramene_homologs and consensus_homologs by focusing on single-locus querying.

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?

Guides usage by explaining default homology_type and how to change it for paralogs or all. Also recommends pairing with resolve_locus_to_uniprot and blast_sequence for additional data, but does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool.

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