Set the Woolworths delivery location

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that the tool changes session state, alters the serving store, and directly affects the results returned by search_products and get_product. It also discloses the ambiguity behavior: matches are returned and the agent should ask for clarification. There is no contradiction with the 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?

Two sentences deliver the core purpose, the downstream effects, and the edge-case handling with no redundant wording. The main action is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter setter, the description covers the action, its impact, and the ambiguous-input behavior. It does not describe the exact success response format, but the tool has no output schema and the narrative description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it 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?

The schema already fully documents the single 'suburb' parameter, including an example and a note that partial names match. The description reinforces the ambiguity-handling behavior but does not add substantially new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. Given 100% schema description coverage, this is an appropriate baseline score.

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 ('Switch the session') and a clear resource ('a New Zealand suburb'), and it explains the consequence of changing the serving store. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like get_location, which reads the current location rather than setting it.

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 context for when to use the tool: to switch the session's delivery location and thereby affect product prices and availability. It also instructs the agent to ask for a more specific name when matches are returned, which is practical usage guidance. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the alternatives are structurally different read-type operations.

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