get_credible_set_colocalisation

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

The readOnlyHint annotation indicates the operation is safe, but the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond that. It does not disclose pagination behavior, the structure of results, or any filtering semantics; it merely restates the tool's name in sentence form.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It efficiently conveys the core purpose, making excellent use of word count.

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 simple read-only nature, readOnlyHint, and presence of an output schema, the description is minimally viable. However, it lacks usage context and parameter elaboration, making it incomplete enough to be merely average.

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 0% description coverage, but the description fails to compensate. It mentions 'credible set' but never clarifies that study_locus_id is the identifier, nor does it explain page_size and page_index, though these are relatively self-explanatory from their names.

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 tool's function: 'Retrieve colocalisation results for a credible set.' This is a specific verb+resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_credible_set_by_id, which retrieves credible sets themselves, and other tools for diseases, drugs, etc.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, edge cases, or relationship to sibling tools such as get_credible_set_by_id or get_credible_sets.

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