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

The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it declares the operation as a mutation, specifies the YCBM API endpoint and JSON body, notes required fields, explains the fields passthrough behavior, and clarifies that profileId is path-only. This is exactly the kind of context that helps an agent invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Three dense sentences, each earning its place. The mutation warning and core action are front-loaded, followed by endpoint details, required params, and the path-vs-body caveat. No filler or repetition of schema prose.

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 create tool with no output schema and no enum constraints, the description covers endpoint, required fields, and body semantics well. It does not describe the response shape or error conditions, but those are not essential for selecting and invoking the tool correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by highlighting that fields can carry value and notes, and by explicitly warning that profileId is never sent in the body, which is not obvious from the schema alone.

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 and resource: "adds a location to a profile." It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like create_booking or create_team_member by naming the exact entity being created.

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 context is implied rather than explicit: the tool is for adding a location, and required fields are noted. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as list_locations or create_appointment_type, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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