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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the result set is limited to locations the login can reach, and a Cotlet API key with access to this app is required. It does not discuss pagination or result size, but the added auth and scoping detail is substantive.

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 scoping statement is front-loaded and the whole description is only a few sentences. The second sentence ("Returns every Meevo location your staff login can reach") largely restates the first, and "Time zone is the one set on the location" is mild filler, but neither bloats the definition badly.

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 no-parameter, read-only list tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description supplies the essentials: the auth prerequisite, the visibility scope, the fields returned (address, time zone, location_id), and how the ID feeds other tools. Pagination/ordering behavior is unstated but unlikely to block correct invocation.

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 tool takes zero input parameters (empty object schema), so there is nothing to document on the input side and the baseline is 4. The mention of location_id refers to an output field consumed by other tools, not an input parameter, so it does not add or detract from parameter semantics.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (list locations), states scope (every Meevo location the staff login can reach), and enumerates what each item carries (address, time zone). No sibling tool in the Meevo set lists locations, so the agent can identify it unambiguously.

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?

Gives concrete downstream guidance: "Use location_id from each item as the location_id parameter of the other tools," which tells the agent exactly why and when to call this before other Meevo tools. It stops short of naming alternatives or explicit exclusions, so it sits at clear-context rather than full when/when-not coverage.

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