Get Saved Places

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'Return' and mentions demo places, offering no detail about response shape, absence behavior, or whether any state changes occur. This is only slightly more informative than the tool name itself.

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 short sentence with the action and key examples front-loaded. Every word contributes value and there is no redundant or filler 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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the core invocation is simple and the description covers the basic purpose. However, the ambiguity with the sibling list_saved_places and the lack of any behavioral or return detail make it only minimally complete.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameter behavior because there are no parameters to document.

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 'Return' and clearly identifies the resource as saved places, listing examples like Home, Work, and SRM. It is not a tautology, but it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool list_saved_places.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus list_saved_places or other saved-place tools. It only implies a read action without stating conditions, exclusions, or alternatives.

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