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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that it lists 'every' warp for a location, implying exhaustive results, and lists the fields returned. It does not disclose pagination, ordering, or potential performance characteristics, but given annotation coverage, this 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action, resource, and key return fields. There is no redundant phrasing or filler, making it optimally concise for an agent to parse.

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 an output schema present, return values are already structured. The description explains the purpose and scope (all warps for a location) and lists important return fields. The single parameter is fully documented; nothing essential for invocation 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?

The schema covers 100% of the parameter (location_id) with a clear description: 'Persistent numeric Atlas location ID.' The tool description only refers to 'a location' without adding format or type details beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for a well-documented schema.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('every Archive warp') with a clear condition ('linked to a location'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_location (single location) or find_locations_near (spatial search), making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need warps associated with a specific location. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or say when not to use it, but the binding to location_id is clear enough for an agent to route correctly.

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