List locations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the listing is scoped to a subscription, providing mild behavioral context, but does not mention pagination, ordering, or return format. This does not contradict annotations.

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?

A single, short sentence containing only the essential verb and resource. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 low-complexity, read-only list tool with one optional, fully documented parameter and rich annotations, the description is complete enough. The absence of an output schema is not a significant gap because the tool's name and description make the return type obvious.

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%, with the sole parameter 'subscription' already documented as defaulting to AZURE_SUBSCRIPTION_ID. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('regions available to a subscription'), making the tool's purpose clear. It is readily distinguished from sibling tools like list_subscriptions, list_resource_groups, and list_resources because it targets locations/regions specifically.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource type, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. For a simple list operation this is acceptable, yet no direct comparison to siblings is provided.

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