list_locations

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Return' is consistent with a read-only operation. It adds useful context about the response format ('indented outline' and 'full tree'), but does not disclose potential limits like pagination or depth constraints, which would go beyond the annotation.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the action, resource, and output format efficiently.

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 simple zero-parameter read-only tool, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know: the tool returns the entire location tree as an indented outline. The presence of an output schema covers specifics of the return structure.

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 tool takes zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there is no parameter information needing explanation. Per the calibration baseline, a no-parameter tool receives a score of 4.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') with a clear resource ('full location tree') and format ('indented outline'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like location_contents, which likely focus on a single location's contents.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives. However, the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer it is for retrieving the entire location hierarchy, so usage is implied rather than absent.

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