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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds the underlying call (GET /api/v1/resource/Company) and the Company alias, but says nothing about pagination, permissions, or whether the list can be empty/scoped — modest added value against a low annotation bar.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, followed by the disambiguation and endpoint. No filler or repetition of the title.

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 no output schema, the definition covers identity, vocabulary aliasing, downstream Id usage, and the raw endpoint. The only gap is the shape of the returned location records, which the agent must discover by calling it.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so the baseline is 4. The note about the returned Id mapping to location_id used by sibling tools is useful output-side context but not a parameter concern.

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 ('List the install's locations (workplaces)') and immediately disambiguates the domain vocabulary most agents would trip on: Deputy calls a location a Company. This lets an agent distinguish it from deputy_list_areas and deputy_list_employees without opening any schema.

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?

Provides clear context for when this tool matters: its Id 'is what other tools take as location_id', effectively telling the agent to call this first when a location_id is needed elsewhere. It stops short of naming explicit alternatives or exclusions, so it is a 4 rather than a 5.

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