List merchant locations

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

Annotations already establish that the tool is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful context beyond those hints by specifying that the operation is scoped to the authenticated merchant and that it requires a craveup login, which addresses authentication requirements.

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 short sentences, each adding distinct value: what the tool does, when to use it, and what prerequisite is needed. There is no redundancy or filler.

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?

This is a simple read-only list operation with one optional parameter, an output schema, and strong annotations. The description covers the tool's purpose, use case, scope, and authentication requirement, so nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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%, so the single optional limit parameter is fully documented in the schema with min, max, and default. The description does not need to repeat parameter information, and the baseline of 3 applies given the high coverage.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List locations for the authenticated merchant.' It also adds the dashboard context ('dashboard locations-stats') and a concrete use case, which distinguishes it from related location tools like create_location, get_location_settings, and delete_location.

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?

It provides a clear use case: 'Use to verify multi-location setup without opening the browser.' It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the intended purpose is clear enough for an agent to decide when to call it.

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