uniprot_compute_properties

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds crucial detail: 'Pure-Python — no additional external API call beyond the FASTA fetch' and specifies standard methods (Lehninger pK, Kyte-Doolittle, Pace 1995 formula), fully disclosing external dependencies and computation approach.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and followed by methodology. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (context indicates has output schema=true), the description sufficiently explains inputs (accession, response_format) and outputs (list of properties). No gaps remain for an agent to use this tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-level details beyond the schema, but it explains the overall computation context. No extra value for parameters beyond what schema already provides.

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 'Derived sequence chemistry for a UniProt entry' and enumerates specific properties (molecular weight, pI, GRAVY, aromaticity, net charge, extinction coefficient, composition). This uniquely distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve raw data, sequences, or features.

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 usage for computing physical/chemical properties from the canonical sequence. While it does not explicitly state when to use this instead of siblings like uniprot_get_entry, the context and enumerated properties make the use case clear.

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