Find Woolworths pick-up stores

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond them: unfiltered results are only a sample, each store appears once, and the 'areas' field contains every region under which the store is listed. It also clarifies the relationship to the delivery-location concept, which the annotations do not cover.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds the critical sampling caveat and the distinction from the delivery-location tool. Every sentence conveys necessary operational context with no filler.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description covers everything needed to invoke it correctly: what it lists, how filtering works, the sample behavior, the uniqueness of stores, the 'areas' field, and the separation from delivery-location tools. No output schema exists, but the description provides enough field context ('areas') and behavioral expectations for the agent.

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 already documents the only parameter, 'query', with meaning and an example. The description adds 'name or address fragment' but this largely restates the schema description. With 100% schema coverage, the description does not need to compensate, so a baseline 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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('Woolworths New Zealand pick-up locations'), and the filtering behavior ('by a name or address fragment'). It also explicitly distinguishes these collection points from the separate delivery-location tool, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 gives concrete usage guidance: an unfiltered call returns only a sample, so the agent must search before concluding a store does not exist. It also names the alternative tools for the delivery location ('get_location and set_location') and explains why they are separate, effectively telling the agent when not to use this tool.

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