get_locates

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the sort order (creation date descending) but omits pagination behavior, result limits, and any details about the date timezone semantics that are only in the schema. For a read tool, this is a minimal but present disclosure.

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 long, front-loads the core purpose, and contains no filler or redundant information. Every word 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?

With an output schema present, return values are covered. However, given the absence of annotations and the large set of sibling tools, the description does not hint at when to use this list endpoint versus the singular get_locate, nor does it mention pagination for large result sets. The rich schema partially compensates, but the description itself is minimal.

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 provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all six parameters, including formats, enums, and pagination token mechanics. The description adds no extra meaning beyond summarizing that filtering is by status, symbol, or date range, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states it returns locate requests for the account and lists the filter dimensions (status, symbol, date range). It uses a specific verb and resource. While it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_locate, the plural 'requests' strongly implies a list operation, so it mostly distinguishes itself.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_locate (singular) or create_locate. The description only explains what the tool does, not when it should be chosen. There are no exclusions or alternative tool mentions.

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