create_company_location

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the obvious mutation ('Create') without mentioning required fields, permissions, idempotency, or success/failure behavior. The agent gets no additional context beyond what a create operation implies.

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 sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's apparent simplicity and front-loads the core purpose.

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 create operation with a rich schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks return value information (no output schema) and does not clarify the relationship to company entities or the meaning of B2B company location. This leaves gaps for a complex nested-address create tool.

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 covers 100% of the 7 parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter semantics; it only repeats the resource type already implied by the 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 action ('Create') and the resource ('a new location for a B2B company'), which distinguishes it from generic sibling tools like create_location by specifying the B2B company context.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_location. It lacks context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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