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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the bar is low. The description does add one useful behavioral fact beyond the annotation — that only active locations are returned — plus the underlying endpoint, but it says nothing about result ordering or volume beyond what the schema's limit/offset notes cover.

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?

A single tight sentence with the scope constraint front-loaded and no filler. The trailing 'GET /locations' is mild redundancy for an MCP tool but costs little.

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 read-only list endpoint with annotations covering safety and a schema that documents pagination fully, the description supplies what an agent needs to select and call it. Only minor gaps remain, such as result ordering or default page size, which the schema partially covers.

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?

With 2 optional parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the schema fully carries the semantics (limit range/default, offset chaining via next_offset), so the baseline is 3; the description adds no parameter detail but the endpoint path modestly reinforces what is being paged, landing slightly above baseline.

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 active locations') and the parenthetical 'addresses that group departments' defines the domain object, letting an agent distinguish it from siblings like shiftbase_list_departments and shiftbase_list_teams without opening a 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?

Usage is only implied: reading locations is the obvious action, and the word 'active' hints that inactive locations are excluded. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to an alternative tool.

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