Get location

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by disclosing that the call returns nested sublocations and premises identifiers, which matters given there is no output schema. It does not mention permissions, error behavior, or depth of sublocation recursion.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It earns its place by combining the fetch action and the return contents, though it is terse enough to leave gaps rather than being padded.

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 read-by-id tool with annotations covering safety, the description is roughly adequate, and it usefully summarizes the return payload absent an output schema. However, the unexplained farm_id parameter and lack of any usage routing leave gaps an agent must guess at.

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 only 50%: location_id is documented ('Location UUID.') but farm_id has no description anywhere. The description adds no parameter detail, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented farm_id or clarify its role relative to location_id.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('location') and goes further by naming what the response contains: sublocations and premises identifiers. This distinguishes it from list_locations (plural) but does not explicitly contrast with get_farm or other singular getters, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance and names no alternatives. It never says to use this over list_locations when a single UUID is known, nor when farm_id should be supplied. Usage is only weakly implied by the singular 'one location'.

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