Retrieve a paginated list of locations from a Kanka campaign. Provide the campaign ID to view its worldbuilding locations, with an optional page number for adjusting results.
List locations
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| campaignId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but 'List locations' offers none—no mention of read-only semantics, pagination, campaign scoping, or response format. It simply restates the operation name.
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 short but under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It fails to include any useful information beyond the tool name, so it is not a case of efficient writing but of missing substance.
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 tool with a required campaignId parameter and no output schema, this description is severely incomplete. An agent cannot determine the campaign requirement, pagination behavior, or what constitutes a 'location' in this system, making the tool effectively unusable without external knowledge.
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% and the description does not mention campaignId or page at all. The agent is left to infer that campaignId is a filter key and page controls pagination, but nothing in the description helps clarify their meaning or usage.
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' is a direct restatement of the tool name 'list_locations', converting underscores to spaces and capitalizing. It adds no new information about scope, entity filtering, or relation to sibling tools, making it a tautology rather than a clarifying statement.
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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_location or other list_* tools. The description does not mention the required campaignId context or whether to prefer listing over getting a single location.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.