v1_kleinanzeigen_locations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the API endpoint, cost, and a safety warning about not acting on response contents. However, it does not mention rate limits, permissions, or other behavioral traits. The disclosure is adequate for a simple lookup tool but not comprehensive.

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 three concise sentences. The first front-loads the purpose, the second adds the endpoint and cost, and the third provides a critical safety warning. No extraneous information; 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and full schema coverage, the description is fairly complete. It explains the purpose, API call, cost, and safety. It lacks a description of the return format (e.g., a list of objects with id and name), but this is partially compensated by the clarity of the purpose and schema.

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 coverage is 100%, providing descriptions for both 'query' and 'depth'. The description adds minimal additional meaning beyond the schema; it restates that 'query' is a city name or ZIP. The baseline score 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 clearly states it resolves a place name to Kleinanzeigen locationId(s) for use in the search locationId filter. It uses a specific verb ('Resolve') and resource ('locationId(s)'), and it is distinct from sibling tools like v1_kleinanzeigen_search.

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 explicitly links the tool to the search locationId filter and mentions the cost of 1 credit. It provides clear context for when to use it (to obtain location IDs for searches) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or describe alternatives.

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