list_locations

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

The description contributes no behavioral information beyond what the name implies. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false; the description adds no pagination, scoping, or side-effect context, so it adds no transparency value beyond the structured metadata.

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 words are maximally short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The phrase duplicates the title and uses its space on no useful distinctions, while the underlying tool has meaningful filters and pagination worth mentioning.

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?

With five optional parameters and a large sibling list, the two-word description is inadequate for an aent to understand when to choose this tool and what behavior to expect. The schema and annotations cover some technical details, but purpose, scope, and usage routing remain unexplained.

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 input schema fully documents all five optional parameters with descriptions, so the description does not need to repeat them. However, the description also adds no extra semantic context about filtering or pagination behavior, leaving the schema to carry the full burden.

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 'List Locations' merely restates the tool name/title and adds no explanatory scope. It identifies the action and resource, but does not differentiate this list operation from get_location or the many other list_* siblings in the toolset.

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 guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_location or other list endpoints. The sibling list implies a broader category, but the description leaves the agent to guess the appropriate use case.

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