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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond this by disclosing the not-found behavior ('Location not found') and warning that results are user-generated untrusted content — useful operational context the annotations do not provide. It stops short of describing pagination or any auth requirements, but for a single-record read that is acceptable.

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?

Three compact sentences, each front-loaded and each earning its place: purpose, routing to the alternative, and error/trust caveats. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields and the not-found sentinel, and annotations carry the safety semantics. There is nothing an agent needs to call this correctly that is missing.

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% for the single parameter, so the schema already documents `location_id` as the Instagram location ID (pk). The description's added value is telling the agent where a valid pk comes from (search_locations, post's location_pk), but it adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema. 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one Instagram location by its ID (pk)') and enumerates the returned fields (name, address, city, zip, category, phone, website, lat/lng), so the agent knows exactly what this yields. It also names the sibling search_locations as the contrasting lookup path, making it easy to distinguish from the many other get_* tools.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it (a pk from `search_locations` or a post's `location_pk`) and when to use the alternative (`search_locations` when you only have a place name). Both the selection condition and the exclusion are present, so nothing is left to inference.

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