get_location_detail

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'Return' indicates a read-only operation, which is the main behavioral trait an agent needs to know. However, the description does not mention edge cases, errors, or any scope limitations beyond 'relevant information.'

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is concise, though 'relevant information' is vague and could be replaced with a more precise field list or pointer to the output schema.

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 one-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description provides the minimum viable context. It lacks explicit usage guidance and parameter explanation, but an agent can likely invoke it correctly with location_id and interpret the output via the output schema.

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 0% and the description never mentions location_id, so it adds no meaning beyond the parameter's name and type. For a required integer ID, the schema's 'Location Id' title is minimal, and the description fails to compensate for this gap.

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: 'Return relevant information for one stock location.' The 'one' qualifier distinguishes it from search_locations, but 'relevant information' is vague about what fields are 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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and the 'one stock location' phrasing: an agent should use this when it needs details for a single location by ID. There is no explicit guidance about when to prefer search_locations or sibling detail tools, but the intended context is reasonably inferable.

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