List locations

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

With readOnlyHint=true already declaring the safety profile, the description adds useful behavioral context: archived locations are excluded by default, include_archived overrides this, and entries include parent path and premises identifiers. It does not discuss permissions or pagination, but the read-only annotation lowers the burden.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by the key default and return-content detail. Every sentence contributes useful information with no waste.

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 two-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, archived behavior, and what each entry carries. It is largely complete, with only minor gaps such as explicit sibling routing or pagination details.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces include_archived semantics by clarifying the default exclusion behavior, but it adds little beyond the schema for farm_id and does not need to compensate for coverage gaps.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List farm locations (premises and sublocations)'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_location, create_location, archive_location, and restore_location, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied: list locations for a farm, optionally including archived ones. The description does not say when to prefer this over get_location or list_animals, nor does it give explicit when-not guidance beyond the archived default.

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