get_variant_info

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

No annotations provided; description states it returns information but does not disclose if it is read-only, rate limits, or any side effects. For a simple retrieval tool, the lack of behavioral context is acceptable but not ideal.

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 action and source: 'Get detailed variant/SNP information from Ensembl by rsID.' Returns are listed briefly. No wasted words.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers input and output adequately. It could mention that it queries the Ensembl REST API or that results may require internet access, but overall it is sufficient for an agent.

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 coverage is 100% with a description for rsid. The description adds 'by rsID' which is already in the schema, so no extra meaning beyond the input 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 'Get detailed variant/SNP information from Ensembl by rsID' and lists return fields (position, alleles, clinical significance, consequences). This specifies the verb, resource, input, and outputs, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_clinvar_variant or get_disease_associations.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_clinvar, get_disease_associations). The description implies retrieval by rsID but does not state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.

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