find_locations

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

With no annotations, the description explains the return format (type discriminator and parent chain) and how id maps to candidate endpoints. It does not cover auth or rate limits, but the behavioral context provided is valuable.

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 two sentences: the first states purpose, the second details return structure. Every word adds value, and it is front-loaded for quick understanding.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return types and parent chain, enabling the agent to correctly interpret results. Combined with clear pagination parameters, it provides a complete picture.

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 description adds marginal parameter detail beyond the schema. It mentions query matching against full address, but this aligns with the schema description. 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 searches for cities, states, and countries, uses a specific verb 'search', and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like find_companies or find_skills by focusing on locations.

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 for location searches but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as search_locations (which appears as a sibling) or when not to use it.

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