get_calendar_locations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does not state that this is a read-only, no-parameter listing operation, nor anything about ordering, pagination, or size of the result set; 'Returns list of locations' merely restates the obvious.

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 core sentence is front-loaded, but the opening pipe-delimited keyword dump is noisy and the return value is stated twice ('Returns list of locations' followed by a 'Returns:' block) with no added information in the second statement.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description is not obliged to explain return values — yet it redundantly does so. The main completeness gap is the lack of differentiation from 'browse_locations' and other calendar listing tools, which is the one thing an agent actually needs here.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The keyword string ('venues, committee rooms, locations, where') adds a little vocabulary context but no parameter meaning.

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 clear verb and resource: 'List all locations used for parliamentary calendar events', which is more specific than the tool name alone. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling 'browse_locations', which appears to cover overlapping territory, so an agent cannot confidently choose between them from the text.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives are named. Given the presence of 'browse_locations', 'get_calendar_types', and 'search_calendar' among siblings, the absence of any routing signal is a real gap.

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