datto_edr_locations_list

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses important runtime behavior: the endpoint is resolved from /explorer/swagger.json, and a missing endpoint produces an error listing related models for datto_edr_raw_request. It does not cover rate limits or response structure, but it adds meaningful operational 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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core list operation and then the filtering and fallback details. Every sentence contributes actionable information with no redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 list endpoint with no output schema, the description covers the key dynamic behavior around endpoint lookup and fallback. It does not explain the return shape or pagination behavior, though the skip parameter description already mentions nextSkip from the previous page.

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 schema already documents all five parameters thoroughly. The description adds semantic guidance by explaining that organization filtering happens through "where" and that datto_edr_api_models should be used to discover the correct field names, which is useful beyond 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 uses a specific verb and resource: "List Datto EDR locations," and clarifies that locations are "sites inside organizations," distinguishing them from organizations and from the singular locations_get sibling. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

It gives concrete usage context for filtering by organization via the "where" parameter and points to datto_edr_api_models for field-name discovery. It also names datto_edr_raw_request as the fallback when the endpoint is missing, though it does not explicitly contrast this list tool with locations_get or locations count alternatives.

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