location_contents

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

The description discloses important behavioral details: it returns direct items plus sub-location names only, recursive mode walks the whole subtree and tags items with full location paths, and location can be a name or /-separated path. This adds meaningful context beyond the readOnlyHint 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 efficiently structured: four sentences, each contributing unique information. It front-loads the purpose, then explains return behavior, recursive usage, and location path syntax without redundancy.

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?

The description covers core functionality and recursive behavior well, but since there is no output schema, it only partially details the return format (e.g., what fields of items are returned). The `max_items` parameter behavior is also underexplained, leaving minor gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains the `location` parameter (name or /-separated path) and the `recursive` flag (with usage example), but it does not mention the `max_items` parameter at all, leaving a gap in parameter understanding.

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's function: 'List what is in a location' with concrete examples (tote or shelf). It distinguishes recursive vs non-recursive behavior and differentiates from siblings like list_locations by focusing on contents rather than the list of locations.

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 explicit guidance on when to use recursive mode ('use this when a location has sub-locations you also want the contents of, to avoid querying each one by hand'), but does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use the tool.

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