extract_locus

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must entirely disclose behavior. It only states 'extract genotype data' without mentioning side effects, file outputs, permissions, or any operational details beyond the basic action.

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 sentence, concise with no filler. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices some detail, making it efficient but slightly under-specified.

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 tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description fails to explain what the output is (e.g., extracted genotypes, file format). For a data extraction tool, this is a significant gap, making it incomplete for an agent to understand the full use.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for its 4 parameters. The description adds the context of fine-mapping but does not provide additional semantics beyond what the schema already offers, hence baseline 3.

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 explicitly states the tool extracts genotype data for a specific genomic region around a lead SNP for fine-mapping, providing a specific verb, resource, and purpose. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'clump_snps' or 'query_gwas_catalog' which serve different purposes.

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 indicates use for fine-mapping, implying context but not giving explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned among the many sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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