list_locations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists locations with counts, indicating a read-only behavior. However, it omits edge cases such as the required type parameter, the behavior of filters when mismatched with the chosen type, or the output structure. The added 'listing counts' context offers some value beyond the schema.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and front-loaded, immediately stating the tool's purpose. Every word contributes meaning.

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?

The tool is low complexity and the schema is comprehensive. The description mentions 'listing counts' as the key output, though it does not specify the exact return format (e.g., array of objects with name and count). For a simple listing tool with no output schema, this is nearly complete, but the lack of explicit output structure and filter interaction nuances prevents a 5.

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 100% with detailed descriptions for each parameter. The description does not add significant meaning beyond restating the enum values (countries, cities, neighborhoods) and does not clarify the filtering logic or relationships between parameters. Therefore, the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 verb (List), the resource (countries, cities, or neighborhoods), and the output (with listing counts). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_listings or get_listing, which focus on individual listings or searches, not location options.

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 usage for obtaining location lists with listing counts, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or specific contexts (e.g., for populating filter dropdowns). No alternatives or when-not guidance is provided.

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