Synthesize Protein Intelligence Dossier

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

Discloses it is a read-only compilation tool that does not add scientific judgement. Annotations confirm readOnlyHint=true. Adds context about data sources and assembly, though no details on rate limits or permissions.

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 concise sentences followed by a clarifying statement. Front-loaded with action and scope, no redundant information.

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?

Covers output structure (types of data included) and has output schema. Input requirements are in schema. Missing mention of optional depth parameter but acceptable given schema presence.

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?

Tool description does not elaborate on parameters; relies on schema descriptions. Given 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not mention uniprot_id, gene_symbol, or depth beyond general dossier concept.

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 it generates a complete protein intelligence dossier from 7 data sources, specifying the types of data assembled. Distinguishes from siblings like assess_target_druggability by noting it composes upstream databases without scientific judgement.

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?

Implied usage for gathering comprehensive protein data, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Sibling tools exist for analysis, but no direct comparison or exclusion criteria provided.

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