search_clinvar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the tool searches and finds classifications, without mentioning read-only nature, rate limits, pagination, or what happens on no results. This is a significant gap for a search tool.

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 with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second adds specific detail about the output. The description is appropriately sized for a simple search tool.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description lacks critical context: it does not specify return format, result fields, error handling, or behavior when limit is exceeded. With no output schema, the description should provide more completeness for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. The description mentions the query can be gene name, rsID, or condition, which repeats the schema's description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool searches ClinVar for clinical variant interpretations, specifically mentioning pathogenic/benign classifications. The verb 'search' and resource 'ClinVar' are precise, and the description differentiates from sibling 'get_clinvar_variant' which likely retrieves a specific variant.

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 implies the tool is used for searching variant interpretations but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_clinvar_variant'. No guidance on prerequisites, limitations, or complementary tools is provided.

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