get_variant_protein_coordinates

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

The annotation readOnlyHint: true already communicates safety, and the description's 'Retrieve' adds no further behavioral detail. It omits information about pagination, potential empty results, or any processing quirks beyond what the annotation already signals.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the action and avoids any unnecessary wording. It is concise while still conveying the core purpose.

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?

Although an output schema exists and the annotation covers the read-only nature, the description lacks parameter semantics and usage context for a 3-parameter tool. It is minimally viable for a simple retrieval, but significant gaps remain in how to use it 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 description does not explain any of the three parameters. With 0% schema coverage, it fails entirely to clarify the meaning of variant_id (beyond the name) or the pagination parameters page_size and page_index, leaving the agent without useful parameter context.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and a distinct resource ('protein-level consequences for a variant'), clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like get_variant_info or get_variant_evidences. It precisely states the output type, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use the tool (when protein-level consequences are needed) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion conditions. No guidance is provided on how this relates to other variant-specific tools.

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