hcm_find_locations

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already tells the agent this is a safe read operation, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds a small behavioral clue about finder and country filtering, but it does not explain what the finder returns, whether results are paged, or how the filter behaves.

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 extremely concise with no filler, and the key idea is front-loaded. However, it is so terse that it sacrifices the explanatory value needed for a tool with no parameter descriptions.

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 no output schema, zero parameter description coverage, and no differentiation from similar location tools, the description is not sufficient for an agent to select and call the tool correctly. The brief parenthetical leaves too much to inference.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented parameters. It only explains 'finder' and 'country' at a high level, leaving 'q' and 'limit' completely unexplained.

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 identifies a location finder helper with a country filter, so it names a resource and a filtering behavior. However, 'helper' is vague, and it does not explain how this tool differs from the sibling hcm_search_locations or hcm_get_location.

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 instead of hcm_search_locations, hcm_lov_finder, or hcm_describe_finder. The parenthetical '(finder + country filter)' hints at a mechanism but does not state the intended use case or alternatives.

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