Retrieve OncoKB annotations for a cancer variant using gene symbol and protein change. Access oncogenicity and clinical actionability to guide precision oncology decisions.
Get OncoKB annotations for a variant in a cancer gene. Requires ONCOKB_TOKEN environment variable.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| gene | Yes | Gene symbol (e.g., BRAF, EGFR) | |
| protein_change | Yes | Protein change (e.g., V600E, L858R) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.8Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the token requirement, which is useful but does not reveal other behavioral details (e.g., rate limits, error handling, return format).
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 short sentences: the purpose and a single prerequisite. No superfluous text, and the purpose is front-loaded.
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?
The tool has no output schema, so the description could have explained return values (e.g., mutation effect, drug associations). It is adequate for a simple lookup but leaves some gaps.
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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters ('Gene symbol' and 'Protein change'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 the action ('Get') and resource ('OncoKB annotations for a variant in a cancer gene'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like variant_get and variant_search by specifying 'OncoKB annotations' rather than general variant info.
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 mentions the 'ONCOKB_TOKEN' prerequisite but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like variant_get or variant_search. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.