cloud_storage_get_bucket_location

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

The description discloses an important behavioral trait: the bucket_name parameter is optional and defaults to the default bucket if None. It also states the return type. However, with no annotations available, it does not cover other behavioral aspects such as error handling, authentication requirements, or side effects. It adds some value but is not comprehensive.

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 compact and well-structured with clear Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides useful information without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a simple get-location tool.

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 tool, the description explains the default bucket behavior and return value. However, the lack of mapping to the actual input schema ('request' wrapper) is a significant gap. With no output schema or annotations, the tool definition is only partially complete for an agent to use reliably.

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 contains a generic 'request' object with additionalProperties true, which offers no inherent meaning. The description mentions 'bucket_name' as an optional parameter with a default behavior, but it does not explain how bucket_name maps to the required 'request' field. This mismatch creates confusion and prevents the agent from correctly constructing the input. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description only partially compensates.

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: 'Get the region where a bucket is located.' This is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like cloud_storage_list_buckets, which might also return location information, so it lacks the explicit differentiation needed for a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where a different tool would be more appropriate. This leaves the agent without direction for tool selection.

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