Get the current Woolworths delivery location

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description does not contradict them. It adds useful behavioral context by explaining that the returned location affects every other tool's results and enumerating the returned fields, which goes beyond the structured 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 two sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence earns its place by telling the agent when the result matters.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with a simple return concept, the description is complete. It names the exact return components and explains how the output should be used in the larger workflow, with no output schema required.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers parameter semantics and the baseline is 4. The description adds no param details, but none are needed; it instead clarifies what the response will contain.

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 uses the specific verb 'Report' and names the exact resource: the delivery location for the current session, including suburb, fulfilment method, and store id. It clearly separates this from sibling tools like set_location by characterizing it as the source of truth for all other pricing and availability 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 gives clear guidance on when to call this tool: before trusting any price or availability result, since all other answers are scoped to this location. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives such as set_location, so it falls just short of the top score.

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