list_locationsList countries, cities, or neighborhoods with listing counts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| city | No | City name for neighborhoods (alternative to parent_id) | |
| type | Yes | ||
| parent_id | No | country_id for cities, city_id for neighborhoods |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat safety. The description adds the behavioral detail of returning listing counts, which is useful. However, it does not disclose any limits, pagination, or hierarchical relationships beyond what schema shows.
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?
Single sentence, minimal waste. Every word adds value by specifying the three location types and the inclusion of listing counts.
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?
For a simple listing tool with readOnlyHint annotation, the description is adequate but does not explain the return format (e.g., array of objects). Given no output schema, more detail on the structure of returned locations would improve completeness.
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 67% with descriptions for two of three parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond 'listing counts' which is output, not input. Baseline 3 is appropriate given schema coverage, but no extra value.
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 (list) and resource (countries, cities, neighborhoods) and mentions listing counts. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_listings by focusing on hierarchical location listing rather than full search or individual listings.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_listings, get_listing, or neighborhood_guide. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.