concur_search_locations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and open-world profile is covered. The description adds the useful fact that it returns a match list with id, display name, country, subdivision and currency, but says nothing about result caps, ordering, or empty-result behavior for what is an open-world search.

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 tight sentences: purpose and narrowing options first, return shape second. No filler, no repetition of name or title.

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 read-only, four-parameter search with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is adequate: it conveys purpose, filters, and returned fields. It is missing result-set behavior (limits, ordering, no-match case) and any guidance on choosing view, which for an open-world search tool leaves a real gap.

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% and the view enum is documented thoroughly in the schema itself, so a baseline 3 applies. The description adds only that countryCode/subdivisionCode narrow the city match and that city accepts a name prefix — essentially confirming schema intent without new meaning.

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+resource (search SAP Concur locations) plus the search key (city name) and scope qualifier (the location list expense forms use). It is clearly distinct from every sibling, none of which search locations, and it additionally names the returned fields.

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?

Implies usage — find the location to reference on an expense form — and notes that country/subdivision optionally narrow results. But it never says when to prefer this over other lookup paths (e.g., graphql_query) or what to do when a city yields no match, so the when-not guidance is absent.

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