get_locate

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the paper-trading environment restriction, which is real context the agent could not infer, but says nothing about authorization needs, behavior when the ID is unknown, or rate limits. Return values are covered by the output schema, which lowers the bar slightly.

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 short sentences, zero padding, with the core operation front-loaded and the environmental caveat immediately after. Nothing could be trimmed without losing information.

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 single-resource read with one fully documented parameter and an output schema covering return values, the description is nearly sufficient. The only missing piece is any indication of error behavior or permissions, which a tool hitting an account-scoped resource would ideally mention.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single parameter already carries its own description ("The locate ID."). The phrase "by its ID" adds no syntax, format, or semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: "Returns a single locate request by its ID." The word "single" implicitly distinguishes it from the plural sibling get_locates, but neither that sibling nor create_locate is named, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

"Not available in paper trading" is a genuine when-not constraint, which is more than most one-line descriptions offer. However it does not state when to use this versus get_locates (list all) or create_locate, so the routing guidance is only partial.

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