zones_get_user_location

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. The description only states what is returned, adding minimal additional behavioral context.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and output without unnecessary words, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (which covers return values) and the simplicity of the tool (one parameter), the description is fairly complete. It lacks information about error handling or usage constraints, but for a straightforward location get it is adequate.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description adds value by specifying that the parameter refers to a 'person.*' entity, clarifying the expected entity ID format beyond the schema's bare type string. This helps the agent understand what entities are valid inputs.

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 the tool returns specific location data fields (latitude, longitude, gps_accuracy, source, state) for a 'person.*' entity, which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like zones_get_zone or zones_list_persons_in_zone.

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 implies the tool is for person entities only, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions. No sibling differentiation is provided beyond the entity type hint.

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