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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, fully conveying the safety profile. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as response format, rate limits, or prerequisites. Since annotations carry the burden, this is acceptable but not enhanced.

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 short sentence, 'Single location by id.', with no filler words or repetition. It is maximally concise and front-loaded, appropriate for a trivial lookup tool.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter), the presence of an output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the essential purpose. It doesn't explain return values, but the output schema makes that unnecessary. The main gap is lack of usage context, but that is already reflected in the usage_guidelines score.

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 only parameter 'id' is documented in the schema with type string and an example. The description's 'by id' adds minimal semantic clarity that this is the location identifier. With only one parameter and schema examples present, the description provides basic but sufficient compensation for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Single location by id' clearly indicates the tool retrieves one location based on an identifier. Its singular form distinguishes it from sibling 'locations', which presumably lists multiple locations, and the 'by id' phrase specifies the access pattern. It lacks an explicit verb but is unambiguous.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for looking up a specific location when an id is available, but it doesn't mention alternatives like 'locations' for listing or other relevant tools. There are no exclusions or context cues.

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