get_organization_locations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Get' implying a read operation, but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, nor does it describe any side effects, pagination, or behavior beyond retrieval. For a simple retrieval, more explicit safety statements would improve transparency.

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 sentence that is succinct and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word contributes meaning without any fluff.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description only covers the basic purpose. It does not explain what the returned locations will contain or any additional context like ordering or filtering. For a simple retrieval tool, it is adequate but leaves some 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the parameter. The description adds minimal value beyond repeating 'for a specific organization', which aligns with the parameter. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves 'locations configured for a specific organization' with the verb 'Get' and specific resource 'locations'. It successfully distinguishes from siblings like 'get_organization' (which retrieves org details) and 'list_organizations'.

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 implies usage requires an organization_id, which is clear from the phrase 'for a specific organization'. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool or mention any alternatives, though no sibling directly competes.

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