List Gps Positions

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds that the tool returns a paginated JSON array with pagination metadata, and that page/per_page control pagination. No contradictions; added value beyond annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then usage, return format, and endpoint. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 6 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return type (paginated JSON array) and pagination behavior. It provides sufficient context for an AI agent to invoke the tool 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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'required parameters: company_id' and 'use page and per_page to control pagination', but these are already in the schema. No additional semantic meaning beyond 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 the tool returns a list of all Gps Positions, specifies usage for enumerating Field Productivity records, pagination, finding IDs, and filtering by query parameters. It is specific and distinct, though sibling differentiation is implicit via the endpoint details.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('enumerate Field Productivity records when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters') and mentions required parameter company_id. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives but provides clear context.

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