clokio_list_locations

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral detail—it merely restates the operation ('List') without mentioning any specifics such as whether the response is paginated, includes all locations, or any other traits. With annotations present, this description contributes no extra transparency beyond what is already declared.

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, concise sentence with no extraneous words. It front-loads the action and resource, making it instantly scannable. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with no parameters, no output schema, and a simple list operation, the description fully covers what an agent needs to know. There is no missing information that would prevent correct invocation. The tool is as simple as it gets, and the description is complete for its complexity level.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain any. According to the rules, a zero-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4 for this dimension. The description is consistent and does not omit any parameter information.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('List') and a distinct resource ('locations'). It is unambiguous and easily differentiated from sibling list tools like list_projects or list_employees, which target different entities. The purpose is immediately obvious.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied—one would call it to get the organisation's locations—but there is no mention of alternative tools or conditions that might call for a different approach. It is adequate but relies on inference.

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