list_locations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and scope profile is covered. The description adds the useful note that values are slugs of regions and cities, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or freshness of the list — enough for a 3 given annotations carry the heavier burden.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource is named first and the downstream usage second. Every clause earns its place.

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 trivial zero-parameter lookup with an output schema present, the description need not explain return structure. It says what the tool yields and how the values are consumed, which is everything an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline this starts at 4. The description goes slightly beyond by explaining what the returned values mean (slugs usable as `location`), which is the only semantic information a zero-arg tool can carry.

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 (List) and resource (location slugs), and clarifies the domain as regions and cities. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the exact consuming parameter (`location` in search_jobs), so an agent can tell what this tool exists for without opening a schema.

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 reference to `location` in search_jobs gives clear implied context: call this to obtain valid values before invoking search_jobs. It stops short of an explicit when/when-not or naming alternatives, but the routing intent is unambiguous.

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