List geolocations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that by explaining how the returned geography level changes with the filter applied. It says nothing about auth or pagination, keeping it from a 5.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action then the filter behavior. Every clause carries information and none is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly fills the gap by describing what each mode returns (countries, regions/metros, cities/postal codes). The only omission is routing against the validate_geolocations sibling, otherwise complete.

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 only 33% (country documented, postal_code and cities_search bare), so the description must compensate. It does: it explains that country yields regions/metros and that cities/postal codes are searched, mapping each filter parameter to its role in the query.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List geolocation targets'), so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It is clear but never names or distinguishes itself from the sibling reddit_ads_validate_geolocations, so it falls short of the top mark.

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 concrete context: no filters returns countries, filtering by country yields regions/metros, and cities/postal codes can be searched. This tells the agent how to drive the tool, though it omits when to prefer the sibling validate_geolocations over listing.

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