Get location

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

Despite the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds valuable error handling details: 404 NOT_FOUND, 401 AUTH_INVALID_CREDENTIALS, and the retryable flag for programmatic handling. This goes well beyond the annotation's safety signal.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by a structured error-handling list. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundant or vague content.

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 simple single-record read tool, the description is complete: it explains the purpose, error handling, and parameter semantics are covered by the schema. The presence of an output schema means return values need no further explanation, and the error handling adds important context.

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%: both storeId and response_format are described in the schema. The description mentions 'by store ID' but doesn't add meaningful semantic information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 holds.

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 'Get details for a SINGLE location by store ID' with a specific verb, resource, and scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pinmeto_get_locations (plural) and pinmeto_search_locations, and lists the data returned.

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 use when you have a specific store ID and says 'SINGLE location', which differentiates from listing or searching. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, so it stops short of full guidance.

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