List Checklist List Location Filter Options

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds that the tool supports pagination and optional search, and provides the API endpoint. This adds some context beyond annotations, but no additional behavioral traits (e.g., response structure, rate limits) are disclosed.

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 paragraph of four sentences, which is reasonably concise. It front-loads the main purpose and includes necessary details. The inclusion of the API endpoint may be extraneous but does not harm conciseness significantly. Could be restructured for better clarity.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description only vaguely states the return type: 'a JSON array of available filter values for Inspections.' It does not explain the structure of each filter value or how pagination interacts with the search. The description meets minimum completeness but lacks specifics that would help an agent handle the response correctly.

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 all parameters have descriptions. The description only reiterates that company_id and project_id are required, which is already in the schema. It mentions pagination and search, which correspond to existing schema parameters. Thus, the description adds no significant meaning beyond the input schema.

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 it returns locations associated with inspections for filtering, with pagination and optional search. However, the phrase 'enumerate Inspections' could be misleading as the tool returns location filter options, not inspections themselves. It distinguishes the resource (locations) and operation (list) but doesn't differentiate from sibling filter option tools.

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 provides some usage context: 'Use this to enumerate Inspections when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative filter option tools, which are numerous among siblings. The guidance is present but lacks clarity on selection criteria.

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