ta_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 description adds value by explaining pagination behavior and the compact option for slim summaries. No contradictions; it supplements the annotations with practical usage details.

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, no fluff. The first sentence immediately states the purpose and resource, the second adds a key option. Ideal front-loading and efficiency.

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 9 parameters, one required, no output schema, and annotations present, the description provides a clear overview of functionality, return value (location id for detail tools), pagination, and the compact option. A minor gap is the lack of detail on full record structure, but the description is largely complete for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 9 parameters, so the schema already explains each parameter's meaning. The description adds a single extra tip about compact mode, which provides minor additional value beyond the schema.

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 the tool searches TripAdvisor locations by name, specifies resource types (restaurants, attractions, hotels), and mentions return values (matches with location id and pagination). This is a specific verb-resource combination that helps the agent understand the tool's core function.

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 implies usage when searching by name and suggests using compact mode for slim summaries, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs siblings like ta_search_nearby or ta_get_locations. There are no exclusions or alternatives mentioned, so guidance is minimal.

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