deactivate_location

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

The description discloses key behavioral effects: deactivation triggers movement of inventory, pending orders, and transfers. However, it does not mention reversibility, required permissions, whether the location remains accessible, or what happens if no destination is provided. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only partially fulfills it.

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, but the grammar is slightly awkward ('moves inventory, pending orders, and transfers') which could cause minor misinterpretation. Still, it is efficient and front-loaded.

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?

The tool has significant side effects and no output schema or annotations. The description does not clarify whether destinationLocationId is required (schema lists it as optional), nor does it mention error conditions, idempotency, or how to undo the action. The missing details are critical for a deactivation operation that moves data.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions, but the tool description adds meaning by clarifying that the destination location is for moving inventory, pending orders, and transfers—not just inventory as the schema implies. This extra context helps the agent understand the relationship between parameters.

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 'Deactivate a location' and specifies the associated side effects (moves inventory, pending orders, transfers). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_location and activate_location.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like delete_location or update_location. The description does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, so the agent must infer when deactivation is appropriate.

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