flybase_gene

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly frames this as a read-only lookup and enumerates the returned fields, which is sufficient for a simple retrieval tool. It stops short of discussing ID validation or error behavior, but those are minor given the tool's straightforward nature.

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 short and front-loaded with the core action. The bilingual expansion adds useful detail rather than pure repetition, though the closing phrase about intended research use is somewhat non-essential.

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 single-parameter lookup tool with an output schema, the description covers the key details: data source, required input format, and expected return fields. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly for a Drosophila gene ID lookup.

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 schema has no parameter description and 0% coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so by naming the parameter's role and providing a concrete example ID (FBgn0000015), giving the agent enough context to format the input correctly.

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?

States a specific action ('Get Drosophila gene by FlyBase ID') and names the resource. The description also lists the returned data fields and gives an example ID, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinct from search-oriented siblings.

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 instruction to provide a FlyBase ID implies the tool is for use when the user already has a stable gene identifier. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like flybase_search or say when not to use this tool, so usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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