Get Payee Location

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

The annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' already indicates this is a safe read operation, so the description doesn't need to repeat that. The description adds minimal behavioral context by specifying '[1 API call]', which hints at performance, but it doesn't disclose other traits like error handling, rate limits, or what happens if the ID is invalid. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 extremely concise—just one sentence with a bracketed note—and front-loaded with the core action. Every word serves a purpose, with no wasted information, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the simple read operation with annotations covering safety and full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, without an output schema, it doesn't explain return values or potential errors, leaving gaps in understanding the tool's full behavior for an AI agent.

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 100% schema description coverage, the input schema fully documents both parameters ('budget_id' and 'payee_location_id'), including defaults and requirements. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying the tool uses 'payee_location_id' to fetch a single location, which is already clear from the schema.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('a single payee location by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_payee_locations_for_payee' or 'list_payee_locations' beyond the 'single by ID' aspect, which is why it doesn't reach a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_payee_locations_for_payee' or 'list_payee_locations'. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing a payee location ID, and doesn't mention any exclusions or specific scenarios for its use.

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