snipeit_locations_assets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' weakly implies a read operation, but the description does not disclose pagination behavior, response shape, whether assets are inherited or direct assignments, or any other runtime traits. This is a meaningful gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 zero filler. Every word contributes to understanding what the tool does, and there is no redundant information.

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 one-parameter listing tool, the description is minimally viable, but it lacks detail about the result set: does it include paginated results, full asset objects, or only basic metadata? With no output schema and no annotations, a bit more context about what 'assets at a location' returns would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage: the only parameter, id, is documented as 'Location ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond that schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the operation: list assets, scoped to a location. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like snipeit_hardware_list (all assets), snipeit_locations_get (location details), and snipeit_locations_list (all locations). The verb-resource-scope structure is exact and unambiguous.

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 phrase 'at a location' implies the primary use case: when an agent needs assets associated with a specific location. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as snipeit_hardware_list or mention when not to use this tool, so guidance is merely implied rather than stated.

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